Leonard Gill v Christopher Gill & Anor (MA 140 of 2022) [2023] SCSC 63 (27 January 2023)

Leonard Gill v Christopher Gill & Anor (MA 140 of 2022) [2023] SCSC 63 (27 January 2023)

The respondent, though non-resident, has demonstrated ownership of substantial immovable property in Seychelles sufficient to meet any costs order. The applicants failed to substantiate their claims of insolvency or criminality, and the amount sought as security is excessive and oppressive. Therefore, the application for security for costs is denied.

Citation
[2023] SCSC 63
Parties
Respondent: Leonard Gill; Applicant: Christopher Gill; Applicant: Danby Gill
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
27 January 2023
Case Number
MA 140 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application denied
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Non Residency, Immovable Property, Insolvency
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Non Residency Immovable Property Insolvency

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leonard Gill

Respondent

Christopher Gill

Applicant

Danby Gill

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against a non-resident plaintiff with alleged insufficient assets in Seychelles
  2. 2 Whether the amount sought as security is reasonable and justified

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent, though non-resident, has demonstrated ownership of substantial immovable property in Seychelles sufficient to meet any costs order. The applicants failed to substantiate their claims of insolvency or criminality, and the amount sought as security is excessive and oppressive. Therefore, the application for security for costs is denied.

Court Disposition

Application denied

Orders

  • Application for security for costs is dismissed.