Legal Journals

Security for claim and costs in action of incola against peregrinus

By Jan Neels

In a recently published judgment of the High Court of South Africa, Cape Provincial Division (Silvercraft Helicopters (Switzerland) v Zonnekus Mansions 2009 (5) SA 602)), the Court had to deal with the question whether, in terms of the common law, an order for security for the claim, or only for costs, was to be made when an action (either in convention or in reconvention) is brought by an incola against a peregrinus. Citing a long passage in an article by Prof. Christian Schulze “Should a peregrine plaintiff furnish security for costs for the counterclaim of an incola defendant” , (2007) 19 South African Mercantile Law Journal 393-399, the Court adopted Schulze’s view and held “that there is indeed a practice operating in this division that would permit the court to grant an order directing the plaintiffs to give security for the potential value, and costs, of the second defendant’s claim in reconvention, but that all the circumstances should be considered before a plaintiff is compelled to provide security in full for a claim in reconvention”.

Related posts:

1. Eighteen Publications on South African Private International Law 2007-2008 Sieg Eiselen ?Goodbye arrest ad fundandam. Hello forum non...
2. German Article: Costs of Free Choice of Law from an Economic Perspective An interesting article written by Giesela Rühl has recently...
3. German Federal Constitutional Court on the Service of Statements of Claim in American Class Actions With order of 14 June 2007 the German Federal...

Full post as published by Conflict of Laws on December 02, 2009 (boomark / email).