Mayo v Cantrade [1996] JLR 176 (06 February 1996)

Mayo v Cantrade [1996] JLR 176 (06 February 1996)

The court has complete discretion to order security for costs against a non-resident plaintiff, considering the probability of success or failure but without detailed examination of evidence, unless it would be unjust or oppressive.

Citation
[1996] JLR 176
Parties
Plaintiff: Mayo; Defendant: Cantrade
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
security for costs normally ordered unless unjust
Legal Topics
Costs, Security for Costs
Civil Procedure Costs Security for Costs

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mayo

Plaintiff

Cantrade

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against a non-resident plaintiff

Ratio Decidendi

The court has complete discretion to order security for costs against a non-resident plaintiff, considering the probability of success or failure but without detailed examination of evidence, unless it would be unjust or oppressive.

Court Disposition

security for costs normally ordered unless unjust