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.
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
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the freezing order should be dissolved
- 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment