ORB a.r.l. & Ors v Ruhan & Ors

ORB a.r.l. & Ors v Ruhan & Ors

The March Order did not lapse upon provision of the Negative Pledge because no agreement was reached with Mr Ruhan's solicitors as required by the order. The Orb Parties were in breach of the March Disclosure Order and undertakings, and their conduct justified the imposition of an unless order. Mr Ruhan established a good arguable proprietary claim to the assets and proceeds in question. The clean hands allegations against Mr Ruhan could not be summarily determined and did not bar relief at this stage. The freezing and disclosure orders were varied and extended, and an unless order was made: unless the Orb Parties comply with the March Disclosure Order by the specified date, their claim...

Parties
Claimant: ORB a.r.l.; Claimant: Roger James Taylor; Claimant: Nicholas Thomas; Defendant: Andrew Joseph Ruhan; Third Party: Simon John McNally; Fourth Party: Simon Nicholas Hope Cooper; Fifth Party: Gail Alison Cochrane; Sixth Party: Gerald Martin Smith; Seventh Party: SMA Investment Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Proceedings (freezing Order, Disclosure, Proprietary Claims) / Interlocutory Applications and Case Management Conference
Outcome
Applications by Orb Parties dismissed; applications by Mr Ruhan granted in substantial part.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Disclosure Orders, Proprietary Claims, Breach of Undertakings, Tracing, Clean Hands Doctrine, Case Management, Fortification of Cross Undertaking, Asset Dissipation
Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Insolvency Commercial Law Freezing Orders Disclosure Orders Proprietary Claims Breach of Undertakings +5 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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ORB a.r.l.

Claimant

Roger James Taylor

Claimant

Nicholas Thomas

Claimant

Andrew Joseph Ruhan

Defendant

Simon John McNally

Third Party

Simon Nicholas Hope Cooper

Fourth Party

Gail Alison Cochrane

Fifth Party

Gerald Martin Smith

Sixth Party

SMA Investment Holdings Limited

Seventh Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Proceedings (freezing Order, Disclosure, Proprietary Claims) / Interlocutory Applications and Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the March Order (freezing and disclosure) lapsed due to a Negative Pledge
  2. 2 Whether the Orb Parties are in breach of disclosure and undertakings
  3. 3 Whether Mr Ruhan has a good arguable proprietary claim to certain assets and proceeds

Ratio Decidendi

The March Order did not lapse upon provision of the Negative Pledge because no agreement was reached with Mr Ruhan's solicitors as required by the order. The Orb Parties were in breach of the March Disclosure Order and undertakings, and their conduct justified the imposition of an unless order. Mr Ruhan established a good arguable proprietary claim to the assets and proceeds in question. The clean hands allegations against Mr Ruhan could not be summarily determined and did not bar relief at this stage. The freezing and disclosure orders were varied and extended, and an unless order was made: unless the Orb Parties comply with the March Disclosure Order by the specified date, their claim...

Court Disposition

Applications by Orb Parties dismissed; applications by Mr Ruhan granted in substantial part.

Orders

  • The March Order (freezing and disclosure) remains in force and is varied to include additional assets and disclosure obligations.
  • An unless order is made: unless the Orb Parties comply with the March Disclosure Order by the specified date, their claim and defence to counterclaim will be struck out.