Ruling of the Tribunal on various applications heard at a case management conference held on 30 March 2012.
First, the Tribunal refused the Defendant’s application for security for costs under rule 45 of the Tribunal’s Rules. The Tribunal concluded that, whilst the Claimant had admitted that it was impecunious at the time of the application, taking all the other factors into account it would not be just to order security. In particular, the Tribunal was concerned that making an order for security for costs would risk extinguishing a genuine claim by an impecunious company in circumstances where it cannot be excluded that the Tribunal might ultimately conclude that the Claimant’s impecuniosity has been caused by the Defendant. Secondly, the Tribunal ruled on applications from the parties in respect of the award of costs from two earlier contested applications. In respect of the costs incurred in relation to [2011] CAT 18 the Tribunal directed that the costs should lie where they fell. In relation to [2011] CAT 42, the Tribunal determined that the Defendant was the substantially successful party and entitled to the bulk of its costs, which were summarily assessed. Thirdly, the Tribunal declined to order disclosure of certain documents referred to in a witness filed in support of the Defendant, but indicated certain categories of documents which it expected to see disclosed if Ms White’s evidence is going to be more helpful to the Tribunal’s deliberations on one of the matters in dispute. Fourthly, the Tribunal directed that one of the witness statements lodged in support of the Claimant be withdrawn in its entirety and re-served. It gave guidance as to the matters that should properly be included in the statement.
In addition to making directions to give effect to the Ruling, the Tribunal established the timetable for the future conduct of the claim.
