Apollo XI Ltd v Nexedge Markets Ltd [2025] EWHC 1488 (KB) (17 June 2025)

Apollo XI Ltd v Nexedge Markets Ltd [2025] EWHC 1488 (KB) (17 June 2025)

The freezing injunction was discharged because Apollo failed to make full and fair disclosure of material facts at the without notice hearing, including the true circumstances of the breakdown in relations, the making and context of the audio recording, and the absence of any real risk of dissipation. The evidence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1488 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Apollo XI Limited; Defendant: Nexedge Markets Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Freezing Injunction / Interim Relief (discharge and Continuation Applications) / Return Date Hearing on Discharge and Continuation of Interim Freezing Order
Outcome
Freezing injunction discharged
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Material Non Disclosure, Breach of Contract, Duty of Candour, Asset Dissipation, Loan Agreements
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Freezing Injunctions Material Non Disclosure Breach of Contract Duty of Candour Asset Dissipation Loan Agreements

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apollo XI Limited

Claimant

Nexedge Markets Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Freezing Injunction / Interim Relief (discharge and Continuation Applications) / Return Date Hearing on Discharge and Continuation of Interim Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing injunction should be discharged for material non-disclosure and breach of duty of fair presentation
  2. 2 Whether the freezing injunction should be continued
  3. 3 Whether there was a good arguable case for breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The freezing injunction was discharged because Apollo failed to make full and fair disclosure of material facts at the without notice hearing, including the true circumstances of the breakdown in relations, the making and context of the audio recording, and the absence of any real risk of dissipation. The evidence did not support a good arguable case of asset dissipation, and the presentation to the court was materially misleading.

Court Disposition

Freezing injunction discharged

Orders

  • The freezing injunction is discharged with immediate effect.
  • Reporting restrictions on the audio recording remain in place pending further order.