9. The Trustees complained that the ATE policy did not presently cover potential appeal costs. The court had no difficulty with that. It was an example of something that, if it became relevant, and could not be agreed between the parties, could be the subject of an application to the court for the making of alternative or additional security for costs arising out of any appeal. At the enforcement stage, the costs of any appeal were too remote to require provision: it would not be fair to the claimant and was not necessary to provide appropriate protection to the defendant.
In the result, the court indicated it would grant summary judgment, with no stay, but on condition that the sums to be paid over were ring-fenced along the lines offered and, in addition, making it clear that that ring-fencing was to continue until the conclusion of any appeal process from the arbitrator’s award; and on the further condition that the ATE policy, as amended, be provided at the level of £200,000. It would be expressly ordered that there be permission to either party to apply to vary the conditions.
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker