Diag Human SE v The Czech Republic

Diag Human SE v The Czech Republic

The English court has jurisdiction to order security for costs in favour of a defendant resisting enforcement of a New York Convention award, provided the order is non-discriminatory and available in domestic cases. However, in the exercise of discretion, security for costs should not be ordered in this case because the Claimant is already owed substantial sums under the award, including interest, which would more than offset any costs order in favour of the Defendant, and there is no evidence that the Claimant's impecuniosity was caused by the Defendant's conduct.

Parties
Claimant: Diag Human SE; Defendant: The Czech Republic
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Enforcement (new York Convention) / Application for Security for Costs by Defendant in Enforcement Proceedings
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, New York Convention, Jurisdiction, Discretion in Procedural Orders
Arbitration Civil Procedure International Law Security for Costs Enforcement of Arbitral Awards New York Convention Jurisdiction Discretion in Procedural Orders

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diag Human SE

Claimant

The Czech Republic

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Enforcement (new York Convention) / Application for Security for Costs by Defendant in Enforcement Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to order security for costs in favour of a defendant resisting enforcement of a New York Convention arbitral award
  2. 2 Whether such an order would be discriminatory or contrary to the New York Convention
  3. 3 Whether, as a matter of discretion, security for costs should be ordered in the circumstances of this case

Ratio Decidendi

The English court has jurisdiction to order security for costs in favour of a defendant resisting enforcement of a New York Convention award, provided the order is non-discriminatory and available in domestic cases. However, in the exercise of discretion, security for costs should not be ordered in this case because the Claimant is already owed substantial sums under the award, including interest, which would more than offset any costs order in favour of the Defendant, and there is no evidence that the Claimant's impecuniosity was caused by the Defendant's conduct.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's application for security for costs is dismissed