Gill & Anor v Kaur & Anor [2025] EWHC 156 (Comm) (17 January 2025)

Gill & Anor v Kaur & Anor [2025] EWHC 156 (Comm) (17 January 2025)

The proprietary injunction is continued because the claimants have demonstrated a serious issue to be tried regarding misappropriation of WPHL, damages would be inadequate, the balance of convenience favours the injunction, and it is expedient to grant relief under section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 in support of ongoing Delaware proceedings. There is no material risk of conflicting orders or enforcement issues, and the respondent has failed to comply with prior orders or provide any explanation.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 156 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Tarnjit Singh Gill; Claimant/applicant: Jagjit Singh Gill; Defendant/respondent: Jagjit Kaur; Defendant/respondent: West Properties Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Application to Continue Proprietary Injunction (interim Relief) / Hearing on Continuation of Injunction Post Return Date
Outcome
Application granted; proprietary injunction continued
Legal Topics
Proprietary Injunctions, Interim Relief in Support of Foreign Proceedings, Section 25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, Derivative Proceedings, Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Equity and Trusts Proprietary Injunctions Interim Relief in Support of Foreign Proceedings Section 25 Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 Derivative Proceedings Breach of Fiduciary Duty

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarnjit Singh Gill

Claimant/applicant

Jagjit Singh Gill

Claimant/applicant

Jagjit Kaur

Defendant/respondent

West Properties Holdings Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Continue Proprietary Injunction (interim Relief) / Hearing on Continuation of Injunction Post Return Date

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to continue a proprietary injunction over shares in WPHL pending foreign (Delaware) proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for interim proprietary relief under section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 are met
  3. 3 Whether it is expedient to grant relief in support of foreign proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The proprietary injunction is continued because the claimants have demonstrated a serious issue to be tried regarding misappropriation of WPHL, damages would be inadequate, the balance of convenience favours the injunction, and it is expedient to grant relief under section 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 in support of ongoing Delaware proceedings. There is no material risk of conflicting orders or enforcement issues, and the respondent has failed to comply with prior orders or provide any explanation.

Court Disposition

Application granted; proprietary injunction continued

Orders

  • Proprietary injunction over shares in West Properties Holdings Limited continued until 31 July 2025
  • Further hearing to be set shortly before expiry to consider any further extension