UPC CFI, CD Paris, 27 December 2024: Security for costs order can be amended in case of new facts

An order granting security for costs (R. 158 RoP) can be revoked or amended by the Court if there is a change in the factual circumstances underlying the order. Granting this opportunity to the parties, even in absence of a specific and direct legal provision, is necessary to render the measure consistent with its purpose, namely to address the risk of non-recovery or significant difficulty in recovering costs of the proceedings. 

Security amount for costs determined by the “value” of the action which is to reflect the “objective interest pursued” by the claimant at the time of the filing of the action (R. 370.6 RoP) and any subsequent modifications – like a subsequent reduction of damages – is of no relevance. 

The incorrect citation of the legal provisions upon which the application is grounded does not relieve the Court of its obligation to consider the motion where it is possible to identify the correct legal grounds based on the legal arguments and factual grounds put forward by the applicant in support of the application. This is what occurs in the situation at hand.[Article 42(2) UPCA, Article 76 UPCA]

IPPT20241227, UPC CFI, CD Paris, Microsoft v Suinno - I

IPPT20241227, UPC CFI, CD Paris, Microsoft v Suinno - II
A request for additional security actually amounts to a request to modify the security already granted by increasing its amount (R. 158 RoP). 

The first two arguments (increasing of costs related to the progression of the written procedure and respondent’s admission in the appeal proceedings of lack of financial resources) constitute new facts that must be considered in the assessment on whether to amend its previous order. The Court is of the view, however, that these circumstances are not such as to require a reassessment of the adequacy of the security already ordered.