Kitchin J granted an order for security for costs under rule 24.6 CPR against the claimant in a copyright infringement case. While remaining sensitive to the right of access to the court of the claimant and acknowledging that security for costs should only rarely be ordered solely where the case appears weak, the judge considered an order necessary, the claimant being a nominal claimant (satisfying rule 25.13(2)(f)), with poor prospects of success and whose behaviour demonstrated a want of good faith.

The full summary of this case has been posted on Kluwer IP Law.


To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Copyright Blog, please subscribe here.

Kluwer IP Law

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *