Guerrero & Ors v Monterrico Metals Plc & Anor (Rev 1) [2009] EWHC 2475 (QB) (16 October 2009)

Guerrero & Ors v Monterrico Metals Plc & Anor (Rev 1) [2009] EWHC 2475 (QB) (16 October 2009)

Despite some failures in disclosure by the Claimants at the without notice stage, these were not so material as to justify discharge of the injunction. The Claimants have, albeit just, established a good arguable case against the Defendants for the purposes of interim relief. There is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying continuation of the freezing injunction. The balance of justice favours continuation of the injunction pending further proceedings.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2475 (QB)
Parties
Claimants: Mario Alberto Tabra Guerrero & Others; First Defendant: Monterrico Metals PLC; Second Defendant: Rio Blanco Copper SA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Continuation of Worldwide Freezing Injunction and Related Interim Relief / Interim Application (post Without Notice, Inter Partes Hearing)
Outcome
Freezing injunction and related interim relief continued against Monterrico Metals PLC; disclosure order maintained; timetable for joinder and service of statements of case set.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Disclosure Orders, Vicarious Liability, Negligence, Torture and Inhuman Treatment, Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Non Disclosure in Interim Applications
Civil Procedure Tort Law Private International Law Human Rights Freezing Injunctions Disclosure Orders Vicarious Liability Negligence +4 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mario Alberto Tabra Guerrero & Others

Claimants

Monterrico Metals PLC

First Defendant

Rio Blanco Copper SA

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Continuation of Worldwide Freezing Injunction and Related Interim Relief / Interim Application (post Without Notice, Inter Partes Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants failed in their duty of full and frank disclosure on the without notice application for a freezing injunction
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants have a good arguable case against the Defendants to justify continuation of the freezing injunction
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to continue the freezing injunction and related relief

Ratio Decidendi

Despite some failures in disclosure by the Claimants at the without notice stage, these were not so material as to justify discharge of the injunction. The Claimants have, albeit just, established a good arguable case against the Defendants for the purposes of interim relief. There is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying continuation of the freezing injunction. The balance of justice favours continuation of the injunction pending further proceedings.

Court Disposition

Freezing injunction and related interim relief continued against Monterrico Metals PLC; disclosure order maintained; timetable for joinder and service of statements of case set.

Orders

  • Continuation of worldwide freezing injunction against Monterrico Metals PLC up to £7,200,000
  • Continuation of ancillary disclosure order