Request rejected to release € 56.000 security placed by Ballinno (Article 69(4) UPCA, R. 158 RoP).
The evidence presented by Ballinno on the balance on its bank account is insufficient since in the event of a procedural loss, Ballinno must be able to cover both its own litigation costs – which may well exceed the applicable ceiling – and that of the other parties.
The provision of security does not hamper Ballinno’s access to justice.
The disposal of an action under R. 360 RoP following a withdrawal does not necessarily preclude the application of the principle that the unsuccessful party must bear the costs (Article 69(1) UPCA). Under the circumstances of the case it is not necessary to examine the merits of the case to determine who the successful part is (one party unsuccessful in both instances)
