RE: Good day today1 Jun 2026 18:04
This is a good example of the difference between legal possibility and legal reality.
Yes, security for costs is a legitimate legal mechanism.
Yes, defendants can apply for it.
Yes, courts sometimes grant it.
But none of that tells us whether such an application has actually been made, whether it would succeed, or what amount might be ordered.
The post describes a theoretical legal weapon and then encourages readers to treat it as an impending event.
That is rather like saying a football team could be relegated and then writing as though relegation has already happened.
The existence of a legal procedure is not evidence that the procedure will be used.
Nor is it evidence that the court would grant it if it were used.
Investors should distinguish between:
what lawyers can do,
what lawyers have done,
and what the court has actually ordered.
Those are three very different things.