Tansy Shiptrade Inc v Elemento Ltd [2020] EWHC 193 (Comm) (27 January 2020)

Tansy Shiptrade Inc v Elemento Ltd [2020] EWHC 193 (Comm) (27 January 2020)

The application to vary the injunction was refused because the proposed sale contract did not provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that the cargo sale proceeds would be paid into escrow as required by the court's previous order, and there was a significant risk of dissipation of both the cargo and its proceeds.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 193 (Comm)
Parties
Applicant: Tansy Shiptrade Inc; First Respondent: Elemento Limited; Second Respondent: Richard Rothenberg
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application for Variation of Injunction
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Sale of Goods, Escrow Arrangements, Liability Under Bills of Lading, Agency and Ratification, Risk of Dissipation of Assets
Commercial Law Injunctions Shipping Law Interim Injunctions Sale of Goods Escrow Arrangements Liability Under Bills of Lading Agency and Ratification +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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tansy Shiptrade Inc

Applicant

Elemento Limited

First Respondent

Richard Rothenberg

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application for Variation of Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to vary the injunction to permit sale of cargo under proposed contract terms
  2. 2 Whether the proposed sale terms adequately protect the applicant's interests and comply with the court's prior order
  3. 3 Whether the applicant remains exposed to liability to third parties

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vary the injunction was refused because the proposed sale contract did not provide sufficient safeguards to ensure that the cargo sale proceeds would be paid into escrow as required by the court's previous order, and there was a significant risk of dissipation of both the cargo and its proceeds.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application to vary injunction to permit sale of cargo on proposed terms is refused.