Report comment

I was still in practice at 09.54 and I am still in practice now, and Art. 6 has not paased me by. There is nothing unlevel about a playing field where the losing party pays the winning party's costs; and it is one thing for a claimant, who chooses to sue the defendant, to be at risk that the costs are not in fact paid, and quite another to impose the same risk on a defendant who does not choose to be sued.

Peter, do you think it is fair for a Defendant who wins at first instance and on appeal to be put at further risk for the costs of a second appeal without the costs below being paid into court and the appellant providing security for the costs of the second appeal? Where in your world does stifling stop and fiar play to both sides begin?