Dadourian Group International Inc & Ors v Simms & Ors

Dadourian Group International Inc & Ors v Simms & Ors

The freezing orders should not be discharged because, although there was material non-disclosure at the without-notice stage, the relevant facts were disclosed at the return date and the orders were properly continued. The claimants are not liable under their cross-undertakings as the orders were not wrongly granted and there is a real risk of dissipation. A limited stay of execution is granted to Mr Simms to prevent bankruptcy proceedings pending appeal, but not to Jack and Helga, as they have or have access to assets. Costs are awarded against the defendants on an indemnity basis, jointly and severally. Permission to appeal on costs is refused.

Parties
Claimant: Dadourian Group International Inc.; Claimant: Alex Dadourian; Claimant: Haig Dadourian; Defendant: Paul Simms; Defendant: Selim Rahman; Defendant: Jack Dadourian; Defendant: Helga Dadourian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Applications and Consequential Orders
Outcome
Applications to discharge freezing orders dismissed; freezing orders to continue post-judgment; limited stay of execution for Mr Simms; costs awarded against defendants on indemnity basis; permission to appeal on costs refused; directions for assessment of costs and damages (stayed pending appeal); extension of time...
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Material Non Disclosure, Cross Undertakings in Damages, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Costs Assessment, Permission to Appeal
Civil Procedure Injunctions Costs Freezing Orders Material Non Disclosure Cross Undertakings in Damages Stay of Execution Pending Appeal Costs Assessment +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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
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

Helga Dadourian

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Trial Applications and Consequential Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing orders against the defendants should be discharged for material non-disclosure or because the claims on which they were based failed
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are liable under their cross-undertakings in damages
  3. 3 Whether a stay of execution of the orders should be granted pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The freezing orders should not be discharged because, although there was material non-disclosure at the without-notice stage, the relevant facts were disclosed at the return date and the orders were properly continued. The claimants are not liable under their cross-undertakings as the orders were not wrongly granted and there is a real risk of dissipation. A limited stay of execution is granted to Mr Simms to prevent bankruptcy proceedings pending appeal, but not to Jack and Helga, as they have or have access to assets. Costs are awarded against the defendants on an indemnity basis, jointly and severally. Permission to appeal on costs is refused.

Court Disposition

Applications to discharge freezing orders dismissed; freezing orders to continue post-judgment; limited stay of execution for Mr Simms; costs awarded against defendants on indemnity basis; permission to appeal on costs refused; directions for assessment of costs and damages (stayed pending appeal); extension of time...

Orders

  • Freezing orders against Paul Simms, Jack Dadourian, and Helga Dadourian to continue post-judgment.
  • Applications to discharge freezing orders dismissed.