Dadourian Group International Inc & Ors v Simms & Ors [2007] EWHC 1673 (Ch) (11 July 2007)

Dadourian Group International Inc & Ors v Simms & Ors [2007] EWHC 1673 (Ch) (11 July 2007)

Applications to discharge freezing orders are dismissed. Material non-disclosure occurred before Lindsay J but was corrected before Lewison J, who considered and rejected non-disclosure arguments. Claimants succeeded on merits and risk of dissipation exists, justifying continuation of freezing orders post-judgment. Indemnity costs awarded, joint and several liability imposed, and interim payments ordered.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1673 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Dadourian Group International Inc.; Claimant: Alex Dadourian; Claimant: Haig Dadourian; Defendant: Paul Simms; Defendant: Selim Rahman; Defendant: Jack Dadourian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Judgment Applications: Discharge of Freezing Orders, Costs, Interim Payments
Outcome
Applications to discharge freezing orders dismissed; freezing orders to continue post-judgment.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Material Non Disclosure, Cross Undertakings in Damages, Costs, Interim Payments, Piercing the Corporate Veil
Civil Procedure Injunctions Fraud Freezing Orders Material Non Disclosure Cross Undertakings in Damages Costs Interim Payments +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dadourian Group International Inc.

Claimant

Alex Dadourian

Claimant

Haig Dadourian

Claimant

Paul Simms

Defendant

Selim Rahman

Defendant

Jack Dadourian

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Judgment Applications: Discharge of Freezing Orders, Costs, Interim Payments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether freezing orders should be discharged due to failure of original pleaded claims
  2. 2 Whether material non-disclosure justifies discharge of freezing orders
  3. 3 Entitlement to enquiry on cross-undertakings in damages

Ratio Decidendi

Applications to discharge freezing orders are dismissed. Material non-disclosure occurred before Lindsay J but was corrected before Lewison J, who considered and rejected non-disclosure arguments. Claimants succeeded on merits and risk of dissipation exists, justifying continuation of freezing orders post-judgment. Indemnity costs awarded, joint and several liability imposed, and interim payments ordered.

Court Disposition

Applications to discharge freezing orders dismissed; freezing orders to continue post-judgment.

Orders

  • Freezing orders against Paul Simms, Jack Dadourian, and Helga to continue post-judgment.
  • £50,000 security deposited to be released.