Adelaide Partnerships Ltd & Ors v Danison & Ors [2011] EWHC 4090 (Ch) (24 February 2011)

Adelaide Partnerships Ltd & Ors v Danison & Ors [2011] EWHC 4090 (Ch) (24 February 2011)

Mrs Danison's evidence was intentionally misleading; she knew or must have known the funds received were fraudulently obtained, and her conduct satisfies the objective test for dishonesty and unconscionability. The claim for dishonest assistance is made out against Mrs Danison, but not against Mr Horowitz.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 4090 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Adelaide Partnerships Limited & Others; Defendant: Danison & Others; 5th Defendant: Mrs Danison; 7th Defendant: Mr Herman Horowitz
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Fraud Claim / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim for dishonest assistance upheld against Mrs Danison; claim against Mr Horowitz dismissed.
Legal Topics
Dishonest Assistance, Knowing Receipt, Accessory Liability, Advance Fee Fraud, Money Laundering
Civil Fraud Equity Trusts Dishonest Assistance Knowing Receipt Accessory Liability Advance Fee Fraud Money Laundering

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 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adelaide Partnerships Limited & Others

Claimant

Danison & Others

Defendant

Mrs Danison

5th Defendant

Mr Herman Horowitz

7th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Fraud Claim / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs Danison is liable for dishonest assistance in Mr Danison's frauds
  2. 2 Whether Mrs Danison is liable for knowing receipt of fraudulently obtained monies
  3. 3 Whether Mr Horowitz is liable as an accessory to fraud

Ratio Decidendi

Mrs Danison's evidence was intentionally misleading; she knew or must have known the funds received were fraudulently obtained, and her conduct satisfies the objective test for dishonesty and unconscionability. The claim for dishonest assistance is made out against Mrs Danison, but not against Mr Horowitz.

Court Disposition

Claim for dishonest assistance upheld against Mrs Danison; claim against Mr Horowitz dismissed.

Orders

  • Mrs Danison ordered to compensate claimants for monies paid into the Isabella account and those transferred via Marvel Pride into her Spanish account.
  • Default judgment entered against Mr Danison and associated companies.