Vale SA v BSG Resources Ltd & Anor
All objections to the Part 71 Order fail; the Order was properly made without notice, Vale complied with its disclosure obligations, the scope of the Order is not oppressive, and the applicant's proposals for cooperation do not justify setting aside or varying the Order.
- Parties
- Claimant: Vale S.A.; Defendant: BSG Resources Limited (in administration); Additional Respondent: Dag Lars Cramer
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 30 July 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Enforcement Proceedings / Application to Set Aside/vary Part 71 Order
- Outcome
- Application to set aside/vary Part 71 Order dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Judgment Debtor Examination, Disclosure Obligations, Oppression in Enforcement, Duty of Full and Frank Disclosure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Vale S.A.
Claimant
BSG Resources Limited (in administration)
Defendant
Dag Lars Cramer
Additional Respondent
Procedural Posture
Enforcement Proceedings / Application to Set Aside/vary Part 71 Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Part 71 Order should be set aside or varied
- 2 Whether the application should have been made on notice
- 3 Whether Vale complied with its duty of full and frank disclosure
Ratio Decidendi
All objections to the Part 71 Order fail; the Order was properly made without notice, Vale complied with its disclosure obligations, the scope of the Order is not oppressive, and the applicant's proposals for cooperation do not justify setting aside or varying the Order.
Court Disposition
Application to set aside/vary Part 71 Order dismissed.
Orders
- Mr Cramer’s Set Aside Application is dismissed.
- The Part 71 Order remains in force.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment