Vorotyntseva v MONEY-4 Ltd (t/a nebeus.com) & Ors

Vorotyntseva v MONEY-4 Ltd (t/a nebeus.com) & Ors

There is a real risk of dissipation of the claimant's cryptocurrency assets by the respondents, as evidenced by their failure to provide satisfactory proof of retention and the production of altered or inadequate documents. The freezing order should extend to both the company and the individual directors due to their close involvement. Cryptocurrency can be the subject of a proprietary injunction.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Elena Vorotyntseva; Defendant/respondent: Money-4 Limited t/a Nebeus.com; Defendant/respondent: Sergey Romanovskiy; Defendant/respondent: Konstantin Zaripov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Freezing Order Application / Ex Parte Interim Application
Outcome
freezing order granted
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunction, Cryptocurrency, Proprietary Injunction
Civil Procedure Property Law Freezing Injunction Cryptocurrency Proprietary Injunction

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elena Vorotyntseva

Claimant/applicant

Money-4 Limited t/a Nebeus.com

Defendant/respondent

Sergey Romanovskiy

Defendant/respondent

Konstantin Zaripov

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Freezing Order Application / Ex Parte Interim Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying a freezing order
  2. 2 Whether the freezing order should extend to individual directors as well as the company
  3. 3 Whether cryptocurrency can be the subject of a proprietary injunction

Ratio Decidendi

There is a real risk of dissipation of the claimant's cryptocurrency assets by the respondents, as evidenced by their failure to provide satisfactory proof of retention and the production of altered or inadequate documents. The freezing order should extend to both the company and the individual directors due to their close involvement. Cryptocurrency can be the subject of a proprietary injunction.

Court Disposition

freezing order granted

Orders

  • Freezing order made against Money-4 Limited, Sergey Romanovskiy, and Konstantin Zaripov in respect of the specified quantities of Bitcoin and Ethereum.
  • Claimant to provide fortification of cross-undertaking in damages by payment into escrow or court.