Order

1. The incorrect citation of the legal provisions upon which an application is grounded does not relieve the Court of its obligation to consider the motion where it is possible to identify the correct legal grounds based on the legal arguments and factual grounds put forward by the applicant in support of the application. 2. Where, after issuing an order granting a security for costs and any subsequent appeal, there is a change in the factual circumstances underlying the order, the party affected by the measure, as well as the party benefiting from it, may apply to the Court to revoke the order or vary its terms. Granting this opportunity to the parties, even in absence of a specific and direct legal provision, is necessary to render the measure consistent with its purpose, namely to address the risk of non-recovery or significant difficulty in recovering costs of the proceedings. 3. In a situation in which the security amount for costs has been specifically set with regard to the maximum recoverable costs, as determined by the value of the proceedings indicated by the claimant, the subsequent reduction of damages claimed is of no relevance to the determination of this value because the latter shall reflect the objective interest pursued by the claimant at the time of the filing of the action, according to Rule 370 (6) ‘RoP’, and any subsequent modifications to that interest are immaterial.

value of the proceedings, security for costs