Which is NOT a ground for an interim payment application?

Which is NOT a ground for an interim payment application?

• A. The applicant has evidence to support the claim
• B. The claimant will experience severe hardship if the application is not granted
• C. The application relates to a threshold legal issue
• D. The case involves a straightforward fact-based issue

Answer: (B)

Interim payment decisions are made by looking at whether there is a credible basis to pay something before the full merits are decided. This typically means there is enough evidence to support the claim, or there is a point of law (a threshold legal issue) that should be resolved early, or the facts are straightforward enough to determine the amount quickly. Severe hardship on the claimant, while it speaks to urgency, is not a recognized ground to justify an interim payment in itself. It doesn’t establish a provisional right to payment—the court focuses on the strength of the claim and the ability to determine the amount without full trial. So the statement about suffering severe hardship is not a valid ground for an interim payment application.

Interim payment decisions are made by looking at whether there is a credible basis to pay something before the full merits are decided. This typically means there is enough evidence to support the claim, or there is a point of law (a threshold legal issue) that should be resolved early, or the facts are straightforward enough to determine the amount quickly. Severe hardship on the claimant, while it speaks to urgency, is not a recognized ground to justify an interim payment in itself. It doesn’t establish a provisional right to payment—the court focuses on the strength of the claim and the ability to determine the amount without full trial. So the statement about suffering severe hardship is not a valid ground for an interim payment application.