Wenda Co Limited v Wang Jinhong & Ors

Wenda Co Limited v Wang Jinhong & Ors

There was a material change in circumstances due to amendment of the claim and discovery of double invoicing, justifying the Defendants' discharge application. However, there remains a seriously arguable claim for proprietary and freezing injunctions. The Claimant failed to comply with the duty of full and frank disclosure, but the failure was not deliberate. The interests of justice require the injunctions to continue until trial, with a costs sanction imposed on the Claimant.

Parties
Claimant: Wenda Co Limited; First Defendant: Wang Jinhong; Second Defendant: Syner Ltd; Third Defendant: Effs Global Investment Co Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Roland Frederick Petit
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Interlocutory Application for Discharge and Continuation of Proprietary and Freezing Injunctions
Outcome
Discharge application not granted; injunctions to continue until trial; costs order imposed for non-disclosure.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Proprietary Injunctions, Full and Frank Disclosure, Abuse of Process, Fiduciary Duties, Trusts, Agency, Material Non Disclosure, Sanctions for Non Disclosure
Equity Commercial Law Civil Procedure Freezing Injunctions Proprietary Injunctions Full and Frank Disclosure Abuse of Process Fiduciary Duties +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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wenda Co Limited

Claimant

Wang Jinhong

First Defendant

Syner Ltd

Second Defendant

Effs Global Investment Co Ltd

Third Defendant

Roland Frederick Petit

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Interlocutory Application for Discharge and Continuation of Proprietary and Freezing Injunctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the discharge application is an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether there is good cause/material change of circumstances to allow discharge application
  3. 3 Whether there remains a seriously arguable claim to support injunctions

Ratio Decidendi

There was a material change in circumstances due to amendment of the claim and discovery of double invoicing, justifying the Defendants' discharge application. However, there remains a seriously arguable claim for proprietary and freezing injunctions. The Claimant failed to comply with the duty of full and frank disclosure, but the failure was not deliberate. The interests of justice require the injunctions to continue until trial, with a costs sanction imposed on the Claimant.

Court Disposition

Discharge application not granted; injunctions to continue until trial; costs order imposed for non-disclosure.

Orders

  • Proprietary and freezing injunctions to continue until trial or further order.
  • Claimant to pay Defendants' costs of discharge and continuation applications on indemnity basis.