Khouj v Acropolis Capital Partners Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 1667 (Comm) (24 June 2021)

Khouj v Acropolis Capital Partners Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 1667 (Comm) (24 June 2021)

The court held that, in light of the significant and serious deficiencies in the Defendants' disclosure and explanations regarding the transfer of the ASFL Shares, the inconsistent and incomplete evidence provided by Mr Vaghadia, the late disclosure of relevant documents, and the specific contemplation of cross-examination in the prior order, it was just and convenient to order that Mr Vaghadia attend for cross-examination on his affidavit evidence. The court found that alternative means had been exhausted and that cross-examination was proportionate and necessary to render the court's process effective in enforcing the Defendants' duty to account.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1667 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Azzam Faisal Khouj; Defendant/respondent: Acropolis Capital Partners Limited; Defendant/respondent: Acropolis Capital Management Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Post Judgment Application (commercial Court) / Application for Order for Cross Examination of Officer of Defendants on Affidavit Evidence
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Agent's Duty to Account, Cross Examination on Affidavit, Disclosure Obligations, Post Judgment Enforcement, Privilege Claims
Agency Law Civil Procedure Trusts and Estates Agent's Duty to Account Cross Examination on Affidavit Disclosure Obligations Post Judgment Enforcement Privilege Claims

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Azzam Faisal Khouj

Claimant/applicant

Acropolis Capital Partners Limited

Defendant/respondent

Acropolis Capital Management Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Post Judgment Application (commercial Court) / Application for Order for Cross Examination of Officer of Defendants on Affidavit Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants' officer should be ordered to attend for cross-examination on affidavit evidence regarding the transfer of ASFL Shares
  2. 2 Whether there are significant deficiencies in the Defendants' disclosure and explanations regarding the transfer
  3. 3 What legal principles govern the court's discretion to order cross-examination post-judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, in light of the significant and serious deficiencies in the Defendants' disclosure and explanations regarding the transfer of the ASFL Shares, the inconsistent and incomplete evidence provided by Mr Vaghadia, the late disclosure of relevant documents, and the specific contemplation of cross-examination in the prior order, it was just and convenient to order that Mr Vaghadia attend for cross-examination on his affidavit evidence. The court found that alternative means had been exhausted and that cross-examination was proportionate and necessary to render the court's process effective in enforcing the Defendants' duty to account.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Mr Vinod Vaghadia, officer of the Defendants, is ordered to attend for cross-examination on his affidavit evidence, specifically in relation to the transfer of the ASFL Shares as set out in paragraph 23 of his fourth affidavit dated 29 March 2021.