AJ Bekhor & Company Ltd. v Bilton [1981] EWCA Civ 8 (06 February 1981)

AJ Bekhor & Company Ltd. v Bilton [1981] EWCA Civ 8 (06 February 1981)

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court had no jurisdiction under the Rules of the Supreme Court to order discovery or interrogatories in aid of a Mareva injunction where the discovery sought did not relate to matters in question in the action. While the court has power under section 45(1) of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 to make ancillary orders necessary to make a Mareva injunction effective, such power is limited to what is necessary for the proper exercise of the Mareva jurisdiction and does not extend to general discovery or policing of the injunction. The order made by the High Court was therefore set aside.

Citation
[1981] EWCA Civ 8
Parties
Respondent (plaintiff): A. J. Bekhor & Company Limited; Appellant (defendant): Godfrey Derek Ernest Bilton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 1981
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Ancillary Orders, Discovery, Jurisdiction, Asset Freezing, Interlocutory Relief
Civil Procedure Injunctions Mareva Injunction Ancillary Orders Discovery Jurisdiction Asset Freezing Interlocutory Relief

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. J. Bekhor & Company Limited

Respondent (plaintiff)

Godfrey Derek Ernest Bilton

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to order discovery in aid of a Mareva injunction beyond the issues in the action.
  2. 2 Whether such discovery can be ordered under the Rules of the Supreme Court or only under inherent or statutory jurisdiction.
  3. 3 Whether the order for discovery made by the High Court was within jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court had no jurisdiction under the Rules of the Supreme Court to order discovery or interrogatories in aid of a Mareva injunction where the discovery sought did not relate to matters in question in the action. While the court has power under section 45(1) of the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925 to make ancillary orders necessary to make a Mareva injunction effective, such power is limited to what is necessary for the proper exercise of the Mareva jurisdiction and does not extend to general discovery or policing of the injunction. The order made by the High Court was therefore set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for discovery and interrogatories made by the High Court set aside
  • Respondents may pursue other remedies such as cross-examination on affidavit or variation of the Mareva injunction if proper disclosure is not made