UPC CoA, 19 June 2024: No suspensive effect given to appeal from order to provide security for costs
21-06-2024 Print this page
No suspensive effect given to appeal from order to provide security (Rule 220 and 223 RoP, Article 74 UPCA) and request to expedite appeal rejected (Rule 9(3) RoP).
Granting suspensive effect to an order pursuant to R.220.2 RoP, is possible under Article 74 UPCA notwithstanding R.223.5 RoP.
Suspensive effect only to be given under exceptional circumstances. An example of such exceptional circumstances would be where the appeal is devoid of purpose or would render the appeal largely ineffective if the impugned order were not given suspensive effect, because the consequences of enforcement of the impugned cannot be effectively reversed if the order is later set aside (see UPC_CoA_407/2023, order of 6 November 2023; UPC_CoA_177/2024, order of 2 May 2024). Other exceptional circumstances that could justify suspensive effect would be where the impugned order is manifestly wrong (See UPC_CoA_2/2024, order of 18 January 2024).
No suspensive effect given to appeal from order to provide security for costs. ICPillar not unable to comply with the order, nor would it lead to extreme detriment if it complies.
Request to expedite appeal rejected (Rule 9(3) RoP). The circumstances of the present case are not of such an urgent nature that the interests of ICPillar outweigh the interest of ARM and the principles of due process.
