Discusses the courts' discretion under CPR r.25.13(2)(a) to order security for costs against a claimant resident outside the Brussels regime. Analyses the wording of the rule, noting the difference between "resident" and "ordinarily resident" and the difficulties arising in cases of multiple residence. Considers whether the focus on residence could indirectly amount to discrimination. Suggests that the courts have countered this possibility by developing an additional requirement for an applicant to demonstrate potential difficulty in enforcement. Calls for the rule to be amended to reflect this development
