Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd v Ferster & Ors

The Court of Appeal held that there was no material non-disclosure by ITC in obtaining the freezing and search orders. The judge was entitled to accept Warren Ferster's explanation regarding his belief about the risk of destruction of documents, and the statements relied upon by the Defendants did not undermine the basis for the orders. The alleged non-disclosures and misrepresentations were either immaterial or adequately explained, and the judge's factual assessment was reasonable. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Jonathan Ferster; Defendant/appellant: World Online Software NV; Defendant/appellant: Carmel Media Group NV; Defendant/appellant: Data Traffic Solutions Limited; Defendant/appellant: Four Seasons Advertising Limited; Defendant/appellant: Four Seasons Media Limited; Defendant/appellant: Four Seasons Technology Limited; Defendant/appellant: Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited; Defendant/appellant: Lanesborough Investments Limited; Defendant/appellant: Lanesborough Media Limited; Defendant/appellant: Lanesborough Technology Limited; Defendant/appellant: Woodville Limited; Defendant/appellant: World Online Software Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Search and Seizure Orders, Full and Frank Disclosure, Fiduciary Duties, Material Non Disclosure
Civil Procedure Company Law Freezing Orders Search and Seizure Orders Full and Frank Disclosure Fiduciary Duties Material Non Disclosure

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Jonathan Ferster

Defendant/appellant

World Online Software NV

Defendant/appellant

Carmel Media Group NV

Defendant/appellant

Data Traffic Solutions Limited

Defendant/appellant

Four Seasons Advertising Limited

Defendant/appellant

Four Seasons Media Limited

Defendant/appellant

Four Seasons Technology Limited

Defendant/appellant

Interactive Technology Corporation (Europe) Limited

Defendant/appellant

Lanesborough Investments Limited

Defendant/appellant

Lanesborough Media Limited

Defendant/appellant

Lanesborough Technology Limited

Defendant/appellant

Woodville Limited

Defendant/appellant

World Online Software Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was material non-disclosure by the applicant in obtaining freezing and search orders
  2. 2 Whether the orders should be set aside for alleged misrepresentation or non-disclosure
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in her factual assessment of disclosure obligations

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that there was no material non-disclosure by ITC in obtaining the freezing and search orders. The judge was entitled to accept Warren Ferster's explanation regarding his belief about the risk of destruction of documents, and the statements relied upon by the Defendants did not undermine the basis for the orders. The alleged non-disclosures and misrepresentations were either immaterial or adequately explained, and the judge's factual assessment was reasonable. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed. The freezing and search orders remain in place.