← All Authorities
United Kingdom security for costscosts

Akenhead J in Phaestos Ltd v Ho

[2012] EWHC 662 (TCC)
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtHigh Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
Year2012
StatusPersuasive authority

Key Principle

On an application for security for costs against a claimant company, the court applies the test in CPR 25.13(2)(c), requiring reason to believe that the company will be unable to pay the defendant's costs if ordered to do so; informal or unsubstantiated assurances or third-party 'guarantees' of financial support will not displace that conclusion unless they provide real, enforceable protection for the defendant.

Area of Law

General

Related Cases

TNLC & Anor v Gambling Commission & Ors [2026] EWHC 891 (TCC)
Aabar Holdings S.A.R.L. and others v Glencore Plc and others [2026] EWHC 877 (Comm)
Waterside Class Limited v Mowi ASA & Ors [2026] CAT 32

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Akenhead J in Phaestos Ltd v Ho and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Akenhead J in Phaestos Ltd v H...