Holyoake & Anor v Candy & Ors [2016] EWHC 970 (Ch) (29 April 2016)

Holyoake & Anor v Candy & Ors [2016] EWHC 970 (Ch) (29 April 2016)

The court has jurisdiction under s.37 Senior Courts Act 1981 to grant a freestanding notification injunction where there is a good arguable case and a real risk of dissipation of assets, even if a full freezing injunction is not sought. The claimants have demonstrated both a good arguable case and a risk of dissipation, justifying the grant of a notification injunction.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 970 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mark Alan Holyoake; Claimant: Hotblack Holdings Limited; Defendant: Nicholas Anthony Christopher Candy; Defendant: Christian Peter Candy; Defendant: Richard Steven Williams; Defendant: Steven Miles Smith; Defendant: Timothy James Dean; Defendant: CPC Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Post Defence, Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome
Application for notification injunction granted (on a temporary basis, pending further evidence).
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Freezing Orders, Notification Orders, Risk of Dissipation, Conspiracy, Duress, Fraudulent Misrepresentation
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Interlocutory Injunctions Freezing Orders Notification Orders Risk of Dissipation Conspiracy Duress +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Alan Holyoake

Claimant

Hotblack Holdings Limited

Claimant

Nicholas Anthony Christopher Candy

Defendant

Christian Peter Candy

Defendant

Richard Steven Williams

Defendant

Steven Miles Smith

Defendant

Timothy James Dean

Defendant

CPC Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Post Defence, Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant a freestanding notification injunction under s.37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the claimants have shown a good arguable case on the merits
  3. 3 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

The court has jurisdiction under s.37 Senior Courts Act 1981 to grant a freestanding notification injunction where there is a good arguable case and a real risk of dissipation of assets, even if a full freezing injunction is not sought. The claimants have demonstrated both a good arguable case and a risk of dissipation, justifying the grant of a notification injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for notification injunction granted (on a temporary basis, pending further evidence).

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from disposing, dealing or engaging in transactions with assets above £1m without 7 days advance written notice to claimants' solicitors (temporary injunction).
  • Application adjourned for further evidence.