David Victor Garofalo v David Adrian Crisp & Anor

David Victor Garofalo v David Adrian Crisp & Anor

A proprietary injunction is granted over profits from Seboni brand as a sufficiently pleaded claim exists for breach of fiduciary duty and account; freezing order is refused as proprietary relief and undertakings suffice; ancillary information and preservation orders are granted where proportionate and necessary to police the injunction and facilitate management transition; orders against Second Respondent justified only to extent necessary to make relief effective.

Parties
Applicant/petitioner: David Victor Garofalo; First Respondent: David Adrian Crisp; Second Respondent: Yulia Crisp
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Company Petition Under S.994 Companies Act 2006 / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Proprietary injunction granted over Seboni profits; freezing order refused; ancillary information and preservation orders granted in part; undertakings accepted; some disclosure orders refused as disproportionate.
Legal Topics
Proprietary Injunction, Freezing Order, Disclosure of Information, Fiduciary Duties, Unfair Prejudice, Preservation of Evidence
Company Law Injunctions Equity Proprietary Injunction Freezing Order Disclosure of Information Fiduciary Duties Unfair Prejudice +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Victor Garofalo

Applicant/petitioner

David Adrian Crisp

First Respondent

Yulia Crisp

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Company Petition Under S.994 Companies Act 2006 / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proprietary injunctive relief should be granted in respect of profits from Seboni brand
  2. 2 Whether a freezing order is justified against the First Respondent
  3. 3 Whether orders for provision of information and documentation are proportionate and necessary

Ratio Decidendi

A proprietary injunction is granted over profits from Seboni brand as a sufficiently pleaded claim exists for breach of fiduciary duty and account; freezing order is refused as proprietary relief and undertakings suffice; ancillary information and preservation orders are granted where proportionate and necessary to police the injunction and facilitate management transition; orders against Second Respondent justified only to extent necessary to make relief effective.

Court Disposition

Proprietary injunction granted over Seboni profits; freezing order refused; ancillary information and preservation orders granted in part; undertakings accepted; some disclosure orders refused as disproportionate.

Orders

  • Proprietary injunction against First and Second Respondents over profits from Seboni sales.
  • Order for provision of information about Seboni proceeds by affidavit by 25 April 2025.