Nicholas James Care Homes Ltd v Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited

Nicholas James Care Homes Ltd v Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited

The applicant established a good arguable case for enforcement of the adjudication award and provided solid evidence of asset transfers by the respondent not in the ordinary course of business, creating a real risk of dissipation. The court found the risk sufficient to justify continuation of the freezing injunction pending the adjudication enforcement hearing.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Nicholas James Care Homes Ltd; Respondent/defendant: Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Interim Application (freezing Injunction) in Adjudication Enforcement Proceedings / Return Date Hearing on Continuation of Interim Freezing Injunction
Outcome
Interim freezing injunction continued until after the adjudication enforcement hearing or further order.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Adjudication Enforcement, Risk of Dissipation, Corporate Restructuring, Delay and Non Disclosure, Cross Undertaking in Damages
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Construction Law Freezing Injunctions Adjudication Enforcement Risk of Dissipation Corporate Restructuring Delay and Non Disclosure +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicholas James Care Homes Ltd

Claimant/applicant

Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Application (freezing Injunction) in Adjudication Enforcement Proceedings / Return Date Hearing on Continuation of Interim Freezing Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim freezing injunction should be continued pending adjudication enforcement hearing
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets by the respondent
  3. 3 Whether delay or non-disclosure by the applicant justifies discharge of the injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a good arguable case for enforcement of the adjudication award and provided solid evidence of asset transfers by the respondent not in the ordinary course of business, creating a real risk of dissipation. The court found the risk sufficient to justify continuation of the freezing injunction pending the adjudication enforcement hearing.

Court Disposition

Interim freezing injunction continued until after the adjudication enforcement hearing or further order.

Orders

  • The freezing injunction ordered on 21 April 2022 is continued until after the adjudication enforcement hearing on 15 June 2022 or further order.
  • Costs reserved to the judge hearing the adjudication enforcement claim.