In the matter of Elsmore Resources Limited (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 1884

In the matter of Elsmore Resources Limited (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 1884

The strength of the plaintiff’s claim alone is not sufficient to justify the continuation of the freezing order in the absence of evidence of a risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant.

Parties
Plaintiff: Elsmore Resources Ltd; First Defendant: Ashley Grant Howard; Second Defendant: Periwinkle Investments Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Harry Fung; Fourth Defendant: HF Global Financial Solutions Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Corporate Dispute / Ruling on Freezing Order Application
Outcome
freezing order dissolved
Legal Topics
Freezing Order, Injunction, Contracts Review Act 1981, Dissipation of Assets

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elsmore Resources Ltd

Plaintiff

Ashley Grant Howard

First Defendant

Periwinkle Investments Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Harry Fung

Third Defendant

HF Global Financial Solutions Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Corporate Dispute / Ruling on Freezing Order Application

  1. 1 Whether the freezing order should be dissolved
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's strong claim alone is sufficient to warrant continuation of the freezing order where there is no evidence of risk of asset dissipation

Ratio Decidendi

The strength of the plaintiff’s claim alone is not sufficient to justify the continuation of the freezing order in the absence of evidence of a risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant.

Court Disposition

freezing order dissolved

Orders

  • The freezing order made on 12 May 2014 against the third defendant, as extended on 2 June and 14 July 2014, be dissolved.