North Cyprus Property | Security of Costs

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

North Cyprus Property | Security of Costs

If you wish to sue someone, and this could apply anywhere, you may have to demonstrate your ability to pay the costs of the person you are suing. This seems perfectly fair to me as the person doing the suing may be bringing a purely frivolous case or indeed a case that has no merit. This happens more frequently than you might imagine and why should the person who is being sued unfairly have to bear the brunt financially when the case goes in their favour. That to me, is fair and just.

There are exceptions of course, and this ‘security of costs issue’ is very much to the fore in many property cases here in north Cyprus. It is one of the hurdles you have to jump if you are suing an errant builder/developer/landowner here. The first hurdle an Injunction being obtained.

Many people do not understand that much of the time spent in the courts is spent just putting your ducks in a row and until this is achieved, the real nitty gritty….the reason you decided on litigation, the main case, cannot be argued.

Once your Injunction passes from being temporary to permanent (until the end of the case), you then often move on to the thorny issue of security of costs. If the defendant convinces the judge to agree to security of costs you will be asked to deposit a sum with the court to cover the defendants costs in the event that you lose. Whilst this is fair in some cases, as described above, it seems totally unfair to ask a litigant to do this in the cases where property issues are being fought.

North Cyprus Property | Security of Costs

Why? Because most of those legally fighting their builder/developer/landowner would qualify not to have to pay security of costs if the very person they are fighting had complied with the contract they signed. If the two sides cannot agree, a hearing is convened and the Judge decides on the matter.

My friends who I attended court with yesterday are embroiled in this very issue. They live here, they cannot live in the bungalow they paid to have built because the landowner has made it physically and mentally impossible for them to do so. He now has repossessed the bungalow by dubious methods and thinks it is perfectly in order to keep it without returning the money my friends paid to build it. A usual “I want my cake and eat it” syndrome. Often asking for security of costs, especially in a case like this, is a tactic designed to scare the plaintiff away. The reasoning behind it being 1. they have no money left or 2.it will just be the last straw and they will withdraw and walk away. My friends are doing neither, they can prove they are legally resident here and have every intention of seeing their case through to the bitter end, but let us pray it will be ‘SWEET’ end for them.

I shall be back in court with them on the 28th May 2013. Another court date for my May diary.

Never give in never give up

Pauline Ann Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments are closed.