NO:  2000/3564
Neutral Citation Number: [2001] EWCA Civ 1265
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE CENTRAL LONDON COUNTY COURT
(Deputy Master Joseph)
								Royal Courts of Justice
								Strand
								London WC2

								Wednesday 25 July 2001
B e f o r e:

LORD JUSTICE TUCKEY

- - - - - -

BETWEEN:
JONATHAN KELWAY
Claimant/Applicant
AND:

GUARDIAN INSURANCE LIMITED
Defendant/Respondent

- - - - - -
(Computer Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of
Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 180 Fleet Street,
London EC4A 2HD
Tel: 020 7421 4040
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
- - - - - -

The Applicant appeared on his own behalf

MISS S HEALY (Instructed by DLA, India Buildings, Water Street, Liverpool) appeared on behalf of the Respondent
- - - - - -

J U D G M E N T 
Wednesday 25 July 2001
JUDGMENT
1.	LORD JUSTICE TUCKEY: The respondents to this appeal, Guardian, apply for an order that as a condition of the applicant, Mr Kelway, being allowed to proceed with his application for permission and the appeal if permission is granted he should make some payment and/or provide security for their costs given that after judgment Judge Hallgarten QC ordered him to pay £3,500 forthwith to the respondent's solicitors and £10,000 within 14 days and nothing has been paid. There is a large debate in the papers about the justice of this court making any such order in which peripheral issues which are canvassed at some length, which I do not think it necessary for me to address and cannot decide.
2.	I have to decide whether it would be fair to make an order of the kind Guardian ask for in the face of the applicant's assertion that he has insufficient money to make any substantial payment and so if he is ordered to do so as a condition of appeal he will be unable to pursue his appeal. There is a dearth of information about the applicant's means in the papers but this morning he has given me certain information from which I am satisfied that he would not be able to meet any substantial order so if he were ordered to pay a large sum as a condition of being allowed to continue with his application and his appeal, it would effectively stifle the appeal. I do not think it would be fair to do that, given that Rix LJ must have thought that the applicant had at least some prospect of success on the appeal, or he would not have made the order he did. 
3.	Nevertheless I think it would be right to order the applicant to make some payment, if only a small one given his limited means, as a demonstration of his intention to pursue the appeal and to provide some (albeit small) security to Guardian who, if they succeed on the appeal, are unlikely to recover their costs. I fix the sum at £500 and I direct that unless this sum is paid into court within 14 days the appeal will be stayed. 
ORDER: Application for permission to appeal and extension of time allowed. Respondent's application for security for costs allowed in the sum of £500 to be paid within 14 days or the appeal will be stayed. Costs of both applications to be costs in the application and the appeal.
(Order not part of approved judgment)