Smith & Sons v L'Eau Des Iles [1999] JLR 319 (15 December 1999)

Smith & Sons v L'Eau Des Iles [1999] JLR 319 (15 December 1999)

The court must balance the risk of stifling a genuine claim against the risk of injustice to the defendant if costs are unrecoverable, considering the prospects of success, amount and timing of security, and any delay caused by the defendant.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] JLR 319
Parties
Plaintiff: Smith & Sons; Defendant: L'Eau Des Iles
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
15 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
application for security for costs considered; principles set out
Legal Topics
Costs, Security for Costs, Judicial Discretion
Civil Procedure Costs Security for Costs Judicial Discretion

Source-derived case record

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Smith & Sons

Plaintiff

L'Eau Des Iles

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What factors should the court consider when exercising its discretion to order security for costs?

Ratio Decidendi

The court must balance the risk of stifling a genuine claim against the risk of injustice to the defendant if costs are unrecoverable, considering the prospects of success, amount and timing of security, and any delay caused by the defendant.

Court Disposition

application for security for costs considered; principles set out