Shepherd Construction Ltd v Berners (BVI) Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 763 (TCC) (25 March 2010)

Shepherd Construction Ltd v Berners (BVI) Ltd & Anor [2010] EWHC 763 (TCC) (25 March 2010)

There is solid evidence of a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendants, based on a pattern of non-payment, broken promises, dishonoured cheques, and failure to comply with court orders, justifying continuation of the freezing order. The relevant communications are admissible as they do not attract without prejudice privilege.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 763 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Shepherd Construction Ltd; Defendant: Berners (BVI) Ltd; Defendant: JJW Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Freezing Injunction Application (return Date) / Post Judgment, Return Date Hearing on Continuation/discharge of Freezing Order
Outcome
Freezing order continued, with liberty to apply for amendment upon provision of further asset evidence by JJW Ltd.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Risk of Dissipation, Enforcement of Judgments, Without Prejudice Privilege, Asset Disclosure
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Construction Law Freezing Injunctions Risk of Dissipation Enforcement of Judgments Without Prejudice Privilege Asset Disclosure

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 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shepherd Construction Ltd

Claimant

Berners (BVI) Ltd

Defendant

JJW Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Freezing Injunction Application (return Date) / Post Judgment, Return Date Hearing on Continuation/discharge of Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying continuation of a freezing order
  2. 2 Whether certain communications are protected by without prejudice privilege and thus inadmissible
  3. 3 Whether the freezing order should be worldwide or limited to UK assets

Ratio Decidendi

There is solid evidence of a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendants, based on a pattern of non-payment, broken promises, dishonoured cheques, and failure to comply with court orders, justifying continuation of the freezing order. The relevant communications are admissible as they do not attract without prejudice privilege.

Court Disposition

Freezing order continued, with liberty to apply for amendment upon provision of further asset evidence by JJW Ltd.

Orders

  • Freezing order against both defendants remains in place up to £1.75 million.
  • JJW Ltd ordered to provide evidence of asset values and details of mortgages, loans, and charges for specified UK hotels.