Savanne LTD v Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (in Special Liquidation) & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 535 (29 July 2021)

Savanne LTD v Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (in Special Liquidation) & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 535 (29 July 2021)

The delay by the defendant in seeking security for costs was not of sufficient magnitude or effect to justify refusal of the order, as the plaintiff had itself delayed, had not incurred significant costs in the relevant period, and had not established that its inability to pay costs was due to the defendant's wrongdoing. The requirements for security for costs were met and no special circumstances were established to justify refusal.

Citation
[2021] IEHC 535
Parties
Plaintiff: Savanne Limited; First Defendant: Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (in Special Liquidation) (formerly Irish Nationwide Building Society); Second Defendant: Michael Fingleton
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs in Ongoing Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Before Trial
Outcome
Order for security for costs granted in favour of the first defendant.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Delay in Litigation, Impecuniosity of Plaintiff, Special Circumstances Exception, Companies Act 2014 S.52
Civil Procedure Company Law Security for Costs Delay in Litigation Impecuniosity of Plaintiff Special Circumstances Exception Companies Act 2014 S.52

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Savanne Limited

Plaintiff

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (in Special Liquidation) (formerly Irish Nationwide Building Society)

First Defendant

Michael Fingleton

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs in Ongoing Civil Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether delay by the defendant in seeking security for costs disentitles it to relief
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's inability to pay costs is due to the defendant's alleged wrongdoing

Ratio Decidendi

The delay by the defendant in seeking security for costs was not of sufficient magnitude or effect to justify refusal of the order, as the plaintiff had itself delayed, had not incurred significant costs in the relevant period, and had not established that its inability to pay costs was due to the defendant's wrongdoing. The requirements for security for costs were met and no special circumstances were established to justify refusal.

Court Disposition

Order for security for costs granted in favour of the first defendant.

Orders

  • Stay of proceedings pending lodgement by the plaintiff of €162,996 as security for costs.
  • Security to be lodged within eight weeks of perfection of the final order.