Aspinall's Club Ltd v Lim [2019] EWHC 2929 (QB) (01 November 2019)

Aspinall's Club Ltd v Lim [2019] EWHC 2929 (QB) (01 November 2019)

Mr Lim failed to comply with the Murray Order by not confirming he was not the ultimate source of funds for legal fees and by failing to disclose at least one asset exceeding £20,000. These were serious and material breaches, justifying the activation of the Unless Order, striking out his defence, and entering judgment for the claimant. Relief from sanctions was refused as no good explanation for the breaches was provided.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2929 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Aspinall's Club Limited; Defendant: Han Joeh Lim
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Post Judgment Application (declaration of Compliance/relief From Sanctions)
Outcome
Defendant's application refused; Unless Order takes effect; Defence struck out; Judgment for claimant.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Disclosure Obligations, Relief From Sanctions, Committal Proceedings, Asset Disclosure
Civil Procedure Injunctions Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Disclosure Obligations Relief From Sanctions Committal Proceedings Asset Disclosure

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aspinall's Club Limited

Claimant

Han Joeh Lim

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (queen's Bench Division) / Post Judgment Application (declaration of Compliance/relief From Sanctions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant complied with the disclosure obligations under the Murray Order
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is entitled to relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Lim failed to comply with the Murray Order by not confirming he was not the ultimate source of funds for legal fees and by failing to disclose at least one asset exceeding £20,000. These were serious and material breaches, justifying the activation of the Unless Order, striking out his defence, and entering judgment for the claimant. Relief from sanctions was refused as no good explanation for the breaches was provided.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application refused; Unless Order takes effect; Defence struck out; Judgment for claimant.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay the full fine of £100,000 (less any amount already paid)
  • Defendant's Defence struck out