No jurisdiction on security

Jane Risley analyses a recent ruling with implications for cost recovery for interested parties

The High Court’s ruling in The New Lottery Company Ltd & Anor v The Gambling Commission confirms that the court does not have the jurisdiction to award security for costs to interested parties.
Currently, there is no provision under the Civil Procedure Rules, nor any established authority, that permits security for costs to be granted in favour of an interested party.
Interested parties who contribute to litigation funding should take note of this judgment and its implications for cost recovery.

The recent decision in The New Lottery Company Ltd & Anor v The Gambling Commission [2025] EWHC 1522 (TCC) provides clarity on an important procedural issue: whether interested parties to litigation can apply for security for costs.

The High Court has now confirmed that it does not have the power to grant security for costs to interested parties. Mrs Justice Joanna Smith held that the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) do not confer such jurisdiction

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

No jurisdiction on security

Jane Risley analyses a recent ruling with implications for cost recovery for interested parties

The High Court’s ruling in The New Lottery Company Ltd & Anor v The Gambling Commission confirms that the court does not have the jurisdiction to award security for costs to interested parties.
Currently, there is no provision under the Civil Procedure Rules, nor any established authority, that permits security for costs to be granted in favour of an interested party.
Interested parties who contribute to litigation funding should take note of this judgment and its implications for cost recovery.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Surrogacy children caught in succession gap

A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’

NLJ this week: Online safety law at a crossroads

Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design

NLJ this week: Do Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor meet the misconduct bar?

Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle

NLJ this week: Supreme Court unlocks ‘lost years’ windfall for injured children

A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings

NLJ this week: Finality trumps freedom in arbitration showdown

A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996

Error message

No jurisdiction on security

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

EIP—Rob Barker

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler