Eco Quest Plc v GFI Consultants Ltd & Ors

Eco Quest Plc v GFI Consultants Ltd & Ors

The application to set aside the injunctions for material non-disclosure is dismissed because the only breach—failure to disclose criminal charges against a witness—was minor and would not have affected the original decision. The injunction and freezing injunction are continued because EQ has a good arguable case of fraud and trust, damages would not be an adequate remedy, and it is just and convenient to preserve assets, with variations to protect the interests of all creditors and the Trustee in Bankruptcy.

Parties
Claimant: Eco Quest Plc; First Defendant: GFI Consultants Ltd; Second Defendant: Andrew Nathaniel Skeene; Third Defendant: Junie Conrad Omari Bowers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Applications—continuation of Injunction and Freezing Injunction; Application to Set Aside Injunctions for Material Non Disclosure
Outcome
Application to set aside injunctions dismissed; injunction and freezing injunction continued until trial or further order, subject to variations.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Material Non Disclosure, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Constructive Trusts, Bankruptcy, Liquidation
Civil Procedure Insolvency Trusts Fraud Freezing Injunctions Material Non Disclosure Fraudulent Misrepresentation Constructive Trusts +2 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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eco Quest Plc

Claimant

GFI Consultants Ltd

First Defendant

Andrew Nathaniel Skeene

Second Defendant

Junie Conrad Omari Bowers

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Applications—continuation of Injunction and Freezing Injunction; Application to Set Aside Injunctions for Material Non Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the injunction and freezing injunction should be continued against the defendants
  2. 2 Whether the injunctions should be set aside for material non-disclosure by the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has a good arguable case of fraud and trust claims against the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The application to set aside the injunctions for material non-disclosure is dismissed because the only breach—failure to disclose criminal charges against a witness—was minor and would not have affected the original decision. The injunction and freezing injunction are continued because EQ has a good arguable case of fraud and trust, damages would not be an adequate remedy, and it is just and convenient to preserve assets, with variations to protect the interests of all creditors and the Trustee in Bankruptcy.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside injunctions dismissed; injunction and freezing injunction continued until trial or further order, subject to variations.

Orders

  • Application by second and third defendants to set aside injunctions dismissed.
  • Injunction and freezing injunction continued until trial or further order, subject to variations to protect Trustee in Bankruptcy and creditors.