Memory Corp Plc & Anor v Sidhu & Anor [1999] EWHC 836 (Ch) (21 May 1999)

Memory Corp Plc & Anor v Sidhu & Anor [1999] EWHC 836 (Ch) (21 May 1999)

The freezing and search orders were not discharged because no material non-disclosure or deliberate breach of duty was established; the claim by Memory Corporation plc against the first defendant was struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action, as no fiduciary duty or direct cause of action was established; the application for security for the cross-undertaking in damages was considered in light of updated financial information and the extended duration of the injunctions.

Citation
[1999] EWHC 836 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Memory Corporation plc; Claimant: Datrontech Hong Kong Limited (DHK); First Defendant: Sukhbir Singh Sidhu; Second Defendant: Sunsar Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Commercial / Interlocutory Applications (discharge of Freezing/search Orders, Strike Out, Security for Undertaking and Costs)
Outcome
Freezing and search orders not discharged; Memory's claim against first defendant struck out; directions given regarding security for cross-undertaking and costs.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders (mareva Injunctions), Search Orders (anton Piller Orders), Fiduciary Duties of Directors and Employees, Disclosure Obligations on Without Notice Applications, Security for Costs, Strike Out Applications, Illegally Obtained Evidence
Commercial Law Employment Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Freezing Orders (mareva Injunctions) Search Orders (anton Piller Orders) Fiduciary Duties of Directors and Employees Disclosure Obligations on Without Notice Applications +3 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Memory Corporation plc

Claimant

Datrontech Hong Kong Limited (DHK)

Claimant

Sukhbir Singh Sidhu

First Defendant

Sunsar Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Commercial / Interlocutory Applications (discharge of Freezing/search Orders, Strike Out, Security for Undertaking and Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing and search orders should be discharged for material non-disclosure or defective legal submissions
  2. 2 Whether the claim by Memory Corporation plc against the first defendant discloses a reasonable cause of action
  3. 3 Whether the claimants should provide security for their cross-undertaking in damages and/or security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The freezing and search orders were not discharged because no material non-disclosure or deliberate breach of duty was established; the claim by Memory Corporation plc against the first defendant was struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action, as no fiduciary duty or direct cause of action was established; the application for security for the cross-undertaking in damages was considered in light of updated financial information and the extended duration of the injunctions.

Court Disposition

Freezing and search orders not discharged; Memory's claim against first defendant struck out; directions given regarding security for cross-undertaking and costs.

Orders

  • Application to discharge freezing and search orders dismissed
  • Application to strike out Memory's claim against first defendant granted