Chorus Group v Berner (BVI) Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 3622 (TCC) (01 November 2006)

Chorus Group v Berner (BVI) Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 3622 (TCC) (01 November 2006)

There was no material non-disclosure by Chorus; the respondents' conduct, offshore structure, and lack of transparency established a real risk of dissipation; the claimant had an extremely strong case; continuation of the freezing injunction was justified but the amount was set at £1.4 million, not increased to £2 million.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 3622 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Chorus Group Limited; First Defendant: Berner (BVI) Ltd; Second Defendant: JJW Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Continuation and Variation of Freezing Injunction and Summary Judgment / Return Date Hearing Following Ex Parte Injunction
Outcome
Freezing injunction continued at £1.4 million; application to discharge refused; application to increase to £2 million refused; summary judgment granted on the cheque.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Summary Judgment, Non Disclosure, Risk of Dissipation, Settlement Agreements, Adjudication Enforcement
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Construction Law Freezing Injunctions Summary Judgment Non Disclosure Risk of Dissipation Settlement Agreements +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chorus Group Limited

Claimant

Berner (BVI) Ltd

First Defendant

JJW Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Continuation and Variation of Freezing Injunction and Summary Judgment / Return Date Hearing Following Ex Parte Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was material non-disclosure justifying discharge of the injunction
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying continuation of the freezing injunction
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted on the unpaid cheque

Ratio Decidendi

There was no material non-disclosure by Chorus; the respondents' conduct, offshore structure, and lack of transparency established a real risk of dissipation; the claimant had an extremely strong case; continuation of the freezing injunction was justified but the amount was set at £1.4 million, not increased to £2 million.

Court Disposition

Freezing injunction continued at £1.4 million; application to discharge refused; application to increase to £2 million refused; summary judgment granted on the cheque.

Orders

  • Freezing injunction continued in the sum of £1.4 million
  • Application to discharge injunction refused