ADM Rice Inc v Corporacion Comercializadora De Granos Basicos SA & Ors [2015] EWHC B1 (Admlty) (21 July 2015)

ADM Rice Inc v Corporacion Comercializadora De Granos Basicos SA & Ors [2015] EWHC B1 (Admlty) (21 July 2015)

The respondents, having been properly served with court orders containing penal notices, wilfully and contumaciously failed to comply with asset disclosure and affidavit requirements. The second and third respondents, as directors/officers, were capable of ensuring compliance and are therefore personally liable for contempt.

Citation
[2015] EWHC B1
Parties
Claimant: Claimant; Defendant/first Respondent: CORCOSA; Second Respondent: Enrique Jose Delgadillo Aguirre; Third Respondent: Vanessa Auxiliadora Delgadillo Sacasa
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Application for Committal
Outcome
application granted; respondents found in contempt and sentenced
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Freezing Orders, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Directors' Liability
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Freezing Orders Service Out of Jurisdiction Directors' Liability

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Claimant

CORCOSA

Defendant/first Respondent

Enrique Jose Delgadillo Aguirre

Second Respondent

Vanessa Auxiliadora Delgadillo Sacasa

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Application for Committal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are in contempt of court for failing to comply with freezing orders and asset disclosure requirements
  2. 2 Whether the second and third respondents, as directors/officers, are personally liable for CORCOSA's contempt

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents, having been properly served with court orders containing penal notices, wilfully and contumaciously failed to comply with asset disclosure and affidavit requirements. The second and third respondents, as directors/officers, were capable of ensuring compliance and are therefore personally liable for contempt.

Court Disposition

application granted; respondents found in contempt and sentenced

Orders

  • Second and third respondents committed to prison for 18 months each
  • Respondents to pay claimant's costs on the indemnity basis, summarily assessed