header-logo header-logo

15 September 2011
Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court , CPR
printer mail-detail

Costs—Security for costs—Jurisdiction

Ackerman v Ackerman and others [2011] EWHC 2183 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 62 (Aug)

Chancery Division, Roth J, 12 Aug 2011

The Chancery Division has reviewed the principles applicable to security for costs.

Mr C Orr QC (instructed by Enyo Law LLP) for the Claimant.
Mr J Wardell QC and Ms E Murphy (instructed by Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP) for the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants. 3rd Defendant was not present and was not represented.

The proceedings concerned essentially a dispute between family members. The first defendant was the widow of the claimant’s brother. The claimant and his brother had built up a very successful business of property investment and development. After relations deteriorated T, a tax barrister, had been engaged to give effect to a division of the group of companies so as to achieve a demerger of their interests. The claimant took exception to T’s report and brought proceedings against the first defendant, her son, a new company (the first to third defendants) and T, alleging a series of breaches of the agreement as regards the scope of

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll