Global Asset Portfolio Ltd v Fazriki Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 458 (Comm) (30 January 2026)

There is a good arguable case for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract, and clear evidence of asset dissipation; continuation of the freezing injunction is justified.

Citation: [2026] EWHC 458 (Comm)
Parties: Claimant: Global Asset Portfolio Limited; First Defendant: Fazriki Limited; Second Defendant: Ms Mila Raedermacher; Third Defendant: Cassillis Investment Management Limited; Fourth Defendant: Cyborn Limited; Fifth Defendant: Cuckoobag; Sixth Defendant: Arden SG Holdings PTE Limited; Seventh Defendant: Mr Cunliffe; Eighth Defendant: Protectir Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 30 January 2026
Procedural Posture: Commercial Court Freezing Injunction Application / Continuation Hearing Following Without Notice Injunction
Outcome: Freezing injunction continued
Legal Topics: Freezing Injunction, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Breach of Contract, Asset Dissipation

Commercial Law Civil Procedure Freezing Injunction Fraudulent Misrepresentation Breach of Contract Asset Dissipation

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5

Parties

Global Asset Portfolio Limited

Claimant

Fazriki Limited

First Defendant

Ms Mila Raedermacher

Second Defendant

Cassillis Investment Management Limited

Third Defendant

Cyborn Limited

Fourth Defendant

Cuckoobag

Fifth Defendant

Arden SG Holdings PTE Limited

Sixth Defendant

Mr Cunliffe

Seventh Defendant

Protectir Limited

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Freezing Injunction Application / Continuation Hearing Following Without Notice Injunction

Legal Issues

1 Whether there is a good arguable case for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract
2 Whether there is a real risk of asset dissipation justifying continuation of freezing injunction

Ratio Decidendi

There is a good arguable case for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract, and clear evidence of asset dissipation; continuation of the freezing injunction is justified.

Court Disposition

Freezing injunction continued

Orders

Global Asset Portfolio Limited to produce £100,000 within 28 days to be held in solicitors' account for proceedings.
Mr Wright to provide further affidavit detailing £250,000 personal assets and documentary evidence of Backters token holdings.