Citadel Management Inc v Hertzog [2001] EWCA Civ 157 (6 February, 2001)

Citadel Management Inc v Hertzog [2001] EWCA Civ 157 (6 February, 2001)

Security for costs is appropriate where the appellant is resident outside the jurisdiction and enforcement is not possible under relevant conventions; however, the amount sought must be proportionate. £50,000 is reasonable given the circumstances.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 157
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Citadel Management Inc; Fourth Defendant/respondent: Johan Hertzog
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs on Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted; appeal stayed pending provision of security.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Appeal, Default Judgment, Contempt of Court

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Citadel Management Inc

Claimant/applicant

Johan Hertzog

Fourth Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs on Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Permission to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against an appellant resident outside the jurisdiction
  2. 2 What is the appropriate amount for security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs is appropriate where the appellant is resident outside the jurisdiction and enforcement is not possible under relevant conventions; however, the amount sought must be proportionate. £50,000 is reasonable given the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted; appeal stayed pending provision of security.

Orders

  • Security for costs ordered in the sum of £50,000 to be paid within 28 days.
  • Appeal to be stayed in the meantime.