Qatar Investment And Projects Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art SA & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1300 (13 October 2025)

Qatar Investment And Projects Development Holding Co & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art SA & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1300 (13 October 2025)

Security for costs is justified against all appellants due to residence abroad, Phoenix's inability to pay, and asset dealings making enforcement difficult; £70,000 is proportionate given the scope of the appeal.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 1300
Parties
Applicant/respondent to Appeal: Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co; Applicant/respondent to Appeal: His Highness Sheikh Bin Abdullah Al Thani; Respondent/appellant: Phoenix Ancient Art S. A.; Respondent/appellant: Ali Aboutaam; Respondent/appellant: Hicham Aboutaam
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs on Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Summary Judgment, Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for security for costs allowed; security ordered in reduced sum.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Summary Judgment, Enforcement of Costs Orders, Cross Jurisdictional Enforcement
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Summary Judgment Enforcement of Costs Orders Cross Jurisdictional Enforcement

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 3 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Qatar Investment and Projects Development Holding Co

Applicant/respondent to Appeal

His Highness Sheikh Bin Abdullah Al Thani

Applicant/respondent to Appeal

Phoenix Ancient Art S. A.

Respondent/appellant

Ali Aboutaam

Respondent/appellant

Hicham Aboutaam

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs on Appeal / Court of Appeal, Post Summary Judgment, Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against appellants resident abroad
  2. 2 Whether Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. is unable to pay costs if ordered
  3. 3 Whether appellants have taken steps in relation to assets making enforcement difficult

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs is justified against all appellants due to residence abroad, Phoenix's inability to pay, and asset dealings making enforcement difficult; £70,000 is proportionate given the scope of the appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs allowed; security ordered in reduced sum.

Orders

  • Appellants to provide security for costs in the sum of £70,000.