The Court held that where security for costs was ordered specifically for an appeal and no costs order was made in favour of the respondent on the appeal, the purpose of the security was spent and the funds must be returned to the appellant. Security ordered for the costs of an appeal cannot be redirected to partially satisfy a separate costs order from first instance proceedings, as this would impermissibly elevate the respondent to the position of a secured creditor and treat appeal security as a general pool of funds available to reduce broader costs exposure. The purpose-specific nature of security for costs orders made at first instance and on appeal must be maintained.
The full text is available to signed-in members.