Judge considers security for costs application against an
individual resident outside the EU/EEA
The defendants sought security for costs against the claimant on
the basis that she was an individual resident (broadly) outside of
the EU/EEA (CPR r25.13(2)(a)). The mere fact that a claimant is
resident outside the EU/EEA does not entitle a defendant to
security: "the establishment of residence is merely a
trigger". The court must then consider the impact on any
future enforcement of a costs order.
In Ras Al Khaimah v Bestfort [2016], the Court of Appeal held
that it is usually sufficient for an applicant simply to adduce
evidence to show that there is a "real risk" that it will
not be in a position to enforce a costs order and that, in all the
circumstances, it is just to make an order for security. If
enforcement will be possible but there is a real risk that it will
take longer or cost more than enforcement in the EU/ EEA, security
will usually be ordered to cover
