Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T19:54:11.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Security for Costs: A Valuable Defence or a Burdensome Relic?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

K. Siehr
K. Siehr
Affiliation:
Dr. iur. (Hamburg), M.C.L. (Ann Arbor); Professor of Law, University of Zürich
Get access

Extract

The dilatory defence of security for costs is a burdensome relic. It should therefore be abolished. If such a radical reform is not possible more appropriate rules should govern. These rules may be expressed in the following terms:

Upon application by the defendant the judge may at his discretion order security for costs. No security is ordered if

1. the plaintiff has local funds to meet his potential liability for costs, or

2. the local decision for reimbursement of the defendant is enforceable in the State of the plaintiff's place of business, or

3. the suit in local courts of the defendant's place of business is not frivolously brought.

Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 39 , Special Issue S1: Law and Reality , October 1992 , pp. 291 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Gai, Institutiones 4, 88, 89, 101, 102Google Scholar; Paulus, Ulpian and Julianus, D. 46, 7; Inst. 4, 11, pr.; Novella CXII of 541 A.D.

2. Kaser, M., Das römische Zivilprozeβrecht (1966) sect 39 II, p. 210 et seq.Google Scholar

3. Cf., e.g., Foelix, J.G., Traité du droit international privé (1843) p. 178.Google Scholar

4. Current version of the newly enacted Code of 12 September 1950, BGB1, part III, no. 310–4.

5. Art 851 Code judiciaire [Code of Civil Procedure], in Servais, Jean and Mechelynck, E., eds., Codes belges, vol. 1, loose-leaf edn. (1989) p. 253.Google Scholar

6. S. 323 Retsplejelov [Code of Judicial Proceedings], in Karnovs lovsamling 1988, vol. 7, 11th edn. (1989) p. 6444.Google Scholar

7. S. 89 A polgári perrendtartásról szóló 1952. évi III. törvény [Act no. III/1952 on Civil Procedure], in A polgári eljárás (1970) p. 69.Google Scholar

8. Art 152 Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering van 1827 [Code of Civil Procedure of 1827], in Fruin, J.A., ed., De Nederlandse Wetboeken (1990) p. 1068.Google Scholar

9. Art. 534 Ley de enjuiciamiento civil [Code of Civil Procedure of 1881], in Soler, Rifá, ed., Ley de enjuiciamiento civil (1987) p. 137.Google Scholar

10. Art 32(1) Milletlerarsi Özel Hukuk ve Usel Hukuku Hakkinda Kanun [Statute no. 2675 of 20 May 1982 Regarding International Private Law and Procedure], Resmî Gazete no. 17701 of 22 05 1982, p. 2.Google Scholar English version by Ansay, T. and Schneider, E. in 37 NILR (1990) p. 152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Cf., although not up to date, Szászy, István, International Civil Procedure. A Comparative Study (1967) p. 427 et seq.Google Scholar; Danelzik, Wilhelm, Sicherheitsleistung für die Prozesskosten (Thesis Bonn 1976) p. 106 et seq.Google Scholar

12. An exception is file Netherlands, supra n. 8.

13. S. 57(1) and (2) no. 1 Gesetz vom 1. August 1895 über das gerichtliche Verfahren in bürgerlichen Rechtsstreitigkeiten (Zivilprozessordnung) [Code of Civil Procedure], in Heindl, A., Loebenstein, E. and Verosta, S., eds., Das österreichische RechtGoogle Scholar, loose-leaf edn., no. Ve 1/1.

14. Art. 835 Código de Processo Civil [Code of Civil Procedure of 1973], in Alves, G. Magela, ed., Código de processo civil (1989) p. 135.Google Scholar

15. S. 107 Code of Civil Procedure (version of 1926), in Die japanische ZPO in deutscher Sprache, translated by Nakamura, Hideo and Huber, Barbara (1978) p. 59.Google Scholar

16. S. 57(1) Gesetz über das gerichtliche Verfahren in bürgerlichen Rechtsstreitigkeiten (Zivilprozessordnung) [Code of Civil Procedure] (version of 22 December 1953), Liechtenstei-nisches Landesgesetzblatt 1954 no. 4.Google Scholar

17. S. 65 Code of Civil Procedure, Revised Statutes of Québec 1977 (1979) Chap. C-25, p. 17.

18. Cf., the references cited by Walder, H.U., Zivilprozessrecht, 3rd edn. (1983) p. 416Google Scholar, ftn. 16.1.

19. Cf., e.g., s. 8501(a) Civil Practice Law and Rules, in McKinney's Consolidated Laws of New York Book 7 B (1981 and 1991 Supplement) p. 263Google Scholar; s. 1030(a) Code of Civil Procedure, in West's Annotated California Codes, vol 18a (1980 and 1991 Supplement) p. 29 et seq. of SupplementGoogle Scholar

20. Order 23 Rule 1(a), in The Supreme Court Practice 1988, vol. 1 (1988) p. 396.Google Scholar

21. S. 24 Court of Appeal Act in Statutes of the Province of British Columbia 1982 c. 7; Part 40 rule 1(2) District Court Rules [of New South Wales], in O'Grady, , District Court Practice (1988) p. 560.Google Scholar

22. Porzelack K.G. v. Porzelack (U.K.) Ltd., [1987] 1 WLR 420; [1987] 2 CMLR 333 (Ch.D.).

23. Original version in OJ No. L 299/32 of 31.12.1972; Trb. 1969 no. 101; version of 1978 in OJ No. L 304 of 30.10.1978.

24. This is true, e.g., for Chile, Ecuador and Peru.

25. Loi No. 75–596 of 9 07 1975Google Scholar, Journal officiel 10 07 1975, p. 7076.Google Scholar

26. Corte costituzionale 29 11 1960 n. 67Google Scholar, Foro italiano I (1960) p. 1874.Google Scholar

27. Vincent, J. and Guinchard, S., Procédure civile, 20th edn. (1981) p. 71.Google Scholar

28. The same condition may be found in Greece in Art 169 Ködix politikÉs dikonomias [Code of Civil Procedure of 1968], in Konstantinides, P., ed., Ködix politikés dikonomias (1987) p. 46.Google Scholar

29. The English Chancery Division expressly stated mat ordering security for costs is not, in the ordinary case, in any sense designed to provide a defendant with security for costs against a plaintiff who lacks funds: Porzelack KG v. Porzelack (U.K.) Ltd., supra n. 22, at p. 422.

30. The defendant needs no protection where the plaintiff holds real property within the forum State: cf., e.g., Art. 16 French Code Civil (now abrogated).

31. If reciprocity is granted by the State of the plaintiff's nationality or residence, no security for costs may be asked for: cp. s. 110(2) no. 1 German Code of Civil Procedure, supra at n. 4.

32. If the plaintiff sues in forma pauperis, he is also relieved from giving security for costs: cp. s. 122(1) no. 2 German Code of Civil Procedure, supra n. 4.

33. In a counterclaim of a defendant the defendant as plaintiff of the counterclaim need not give security for costs: cp. s. 110(2) no. 3 German Code of Civil Procedure, supra n. 4.

34. According to the original version of Art 16 French Civil Code (now abrogated) in commercial matters no security for costs had to be given. This was changed in 1895.

35. Actes de la Deuxième Conférence de La Haye chargée de réglementer diverses matières de droit international privé (25 juin — 13 juillet 1894) (The Hague 1894) p. 29.Google Scholar

36. German Reichs-Gesetzblatt (1899) p. 285.Google Scholar

37. Cf., Reichs-Gesetzblatt (1909) p. 409.Google Scholar

38. Reichs-Gesetzblatt (1909) p. 410.Google Scholar

39. Trb. 1961 no. 122, p. 2.

40. Hague Conference on Private International Law, ed., Recueil des conventions, Collection of Conventions (1951–1988) p. 4; Trb. 1954 no. 40.Google Scholar

41. Recueil des conventions, supra n. 40, p. 284.

42. Rev. crit. dr. int. priv. (1992) p. 196. The Convention entered into force between Finland, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Yugoslavia.

43. Art 9(2) of the Hague Convention of 15 April 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions Relating to Maintenance Obligations in Respect of Children, Recueil des conventions, supra n. 40, p. 36; Trb. 1959 no. 187; Art 16 of the Hague Convention of 2 October 1973 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions Relating to Maintenance Obligations, Recueil des conventions, supra n. 40, p. 203; Trb. 1974 no. 85.Google Scholar

44. Art. 17 of the Hague Convention of 1 February 1971 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Recueil des conventions, supra n. 40, p. 107; Trb. 1972 no. 143.Google Scholar

45. Recueil des conventions, supra n. 40, p. 265; Trb. 1987 no. 139.Google Scholar

46. Cf., e.g., Geneva UN Convention of 28 July 1951 Relating to the Status of Refugees, 189 UNTS 137; Trb. 1951 no. 131.

47. Art. 31(5) Geneva Convention of 19 May 1956 on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR), 399 UNTS 189; Trb. 1957 no. 84; Art. 9(2) New York UN Convention of 20 June 1956 on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance, 268 UNTS 3, 32; 649 UNTS 330; Trb. 1957 no. 121.

48. Cf., e.g., Art. 45 EEC Judgment Convention of 1968, supra n. 23 (version of 25 October 1982): OJ No. C 97 of 11.4.1983.

49. Cf., e.g., Art. 8 of the Agreement Between the Government of die Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the French Republic in Order to Simplify Judicial Co-operation Under the Hague Convention of 1 March 1954 on Civil Procedure, BGBl, part II (1961) p. 1041: extension of provisions on security for costs to legal persons (juristische Personal, les personnes morales).

50. Cf., e.g., Art 14 German-British Treaty on Judicial Co-operation of 20 March 1928, Reichs-Geseablatt, part II (1928) p. 623Google Scholar; BGBl, part II (1953) p. 116.

51. Supra, at n. 26.

52. Cf., e.g.; Art 16 French Code Civil (original version); already in die same sense Parlement de Bordeaux 1 March 1777, reported by Merlin, M., Recueil alphabétique des questions de droit, vol. 1 (1819) p. 391 subGoogle Scholar: Caution judicatum solvi § 1, para. 3.

53. Cf., e.g., Porzelack, v. Porzelack, , supra n. 22.Google Scholar

54. Supra, at n. 3.

55. Similar and very early approach shown by Palement de Bordeaux, 1 March 1777, supra n. 52.