England and Wales Case Law

Russian Operator Policy Claims, Re

The Deep Sky Claimants failed to provide sufficient evidence that security for costs would stifle their claims, particularly given evidence that parent and group companies have funded litigation costs to date. The court is entitled to expect claimants to seek funding from within their corporate structure. The amounts sought for security are proportionate and justified. Security for costs is therefore ordered in the amounts sought by the War Risk Defendants.

Source excerpt

• Security for costs
• Corporate structure and funding
• Stifling of claims
• Costs management

Read case analysis

Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors

Commercial Court decision granting security for costs, after finding the claimants had not shown the order would stifle the claim.

• Security for costs
• Delay in application
• Stifling of claim
• Corporate structure and funding
• Security-for-costs
• Delay-in-application

Read case analysis

Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors

Accident Exchange Ltd & Anor v McLean & Ors [2018] EWHC 1533 (Comm) (12 June 2018)

The Commercial Court granted security for costs after finding the claimants had not shown the order would stifle the claim, though delay reduced the amount.

• Security for costs
• Delay in application
• Stifling of claim
• Corporate structure and funding
• Discretionary orders
• Security-for-costs

Read case analysis