header-logo header-logo

24 July 2013
Issue: 7570 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs

Northampton Regional Livestock Centre Company v Cowling and another [2013] EWHC 1720 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 168 (Jul)

It was settled law that, in considering whether an application for security was being used oppressively to stifle a genuine claim, the court had to be satisfied that, in all the circumstances, it was probable that the claim would be stifled. The court should consider, not only whether a claimant company could provide security out of its own resources to continue the litigation, but also whether it could raise the amount needed from outside sources, from, for example: directors, shareholders, or other backers or interested persons, including creditors. In all but the most unusual cases, the burden would lie on the claimant company to show that, apart from the question as to whether the company's own means were sufficient to meet an order for security, there would be no prospect of funds being available and forthcoming from any outside source.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll