Greenwich Inc Ltd v Dowling & Ors [2014] EWHC 2451 (Ch) (15 July 2014)

Greenwich Inc Ltd v Dowling & Ors [2014] EWHC 2451 (Ch) (15 July 2014)

The undertakings and freezing orders must be discharged due to failures of full and frank disclosure, misrepresentation as to the standard form of the orders, and procedural irregularities by the Claimant's legal team. The court cannot rely on advocates who do not draw attention to non-standard provisions or material facts. The failures undermine the integrity of the ex parte process and require discharge of the orders as a matter of principle, subject to the court's residual discretion to re-impose relief if appropriate.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 2451 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Greenwich Inc. Limited (in Administration) (acting by its Administrators Stephen John Hunt and Timothy James Bramston); Defendant: Frank Nugent Dowling; Defendant: Audrey McCracken; Defendant: Madison Lease Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Insolvency Proceedings / Application to Discharge Freezing Order and Related Undertakings
Outcome
Freezing orders and undertakings discharged due to failures of disclosure and procedural irregularities. Action stayed by consent order following settlement.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Ex Parte Applications, Full and Frank Disclosure, Directors' Duties, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Misfeasance, Asset Dissipation
Insolvency Civil Procedure Freezing Injunctions Ex Parte Applications Full and Frank Disclosure Directors' Duties Breach of Fiduciary Duty Misfeasance +1 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Greenwich Inc. Limited (in Administration) (acting by its Administrators Stephen John Hunt and Timothy James Bramston)

Claimant

Frank Nugent Dowling

Defendant

Audrey McCracken

Defendant

Madison Lease Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Insolvency Proceedings / Application to Discharge Freezing Order and Related Undertakings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing orders and undertakings should be discharged due to failures of full and frank disclosure and misrepresentation as to the standard form of order
  2. 2 Whether the orders departed from the standard form without justification or disclosure
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to re-impose or continue any relief

Ratio Decidendi

The undertakings and freezing orders must be discharged due to failures of full and frank disclosure, misrepresentation as to the standard form of the orders, and procedural irregularities by the Claimant's legal team. The court cannot rely on advocates who do not draw attention to non-standard provisions or material facts. The failures undermine the integrity of the ex parte process and require discharge of the orders as a matter of principle, subject to the court's residual discretion to re-impose relief if appropriate.

Court Disposition

Freezing orders and undertakings discharged due to failures of disclosure and procedural irregularities. Action stayed by consent order following settlement.

Orders

  • All undertakings and freezing orders discharged.
  • No further relief granted at this stage; Claimants may apply for further relief if undertakings are not renewed.