1999/86 - Veka v TA Picot and Ors [1999] UR 86 (21 May 1999)

1999/86 - Veka v TA Picot and Ors [1999] UR 86 (21 May 1999)

No special circumstances exist in relation to Mr. Picot personally to justify ordering security for costs; application for security for costs is dismissed.

Citation
[1999] UR 86
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Veka AG; Defendant/appellant: TA Picot (CI) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Vekaplast Windows (CI) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Vekaplast Windows (Export) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Terence Alan Picot
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
21 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Security for Costs Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Appeals, Impecuniosity
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Appeals Impecuniosity

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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Veka AG

Plaintiff/respondent

TA Picot (CI) Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Vekaplast Windows (CI) Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Vekaplast Windows (Export) Ltd

Defendant/appellant

Terence Alan Picot

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Security for Costs Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special circumstances exist to justify ordering security for costs against the appellants
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Picot personally should be ordered to provide security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

No special circumstances exist in relation to Mr. Picot personally to justify ordering security for costs; application for security for costs is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • No security for costs ordered against any appellant