DBI Innovations (UK) Ltd v The May Fair Avenue General Trading LLC & Ors [2019] EWHC 2235 (QB) (16 August 2019)

DBI Innovations (UK) Ltd v The May Fair Avenue General Trading LLC & Ors [2019] EWHC 2235 (QB) (16 August 2019)

The claimant failed to make full and frank disclosure, including misrepresenting the joint venture agreement, failing to disclose material payments and credit notes, making a bogus salary claim, and possibly forging documents. These breaches of duty of candour justified discharge of the worldwide freezing order...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2235 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: DBI Innovations (UK) Ltd; Defendant: The May Fair Avenue General Trading LLC; Defendant: Moon City Star Property Investment LLC; Defendant: Mr Negm Abdelnaby Ibrahim Nasr; Defendant: City Star Trade Brokerage LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Injunction (worldwide Freezing Order) / Return Date Hearing After Ex Parte Injunction
Outcome
Worldwide freezing order discharged for material non-disclosure and lack of candour by the claimant.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Ex Parte Applications, Disclosure Obligations, Joint Venture Disputes, Forgery and Fraud Allegations
Commercial Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Freezing Injunctions Ex Parte Applications Disclosure Obligations Joint Venture Disputes Forgery and Fraud Allegations

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DBI Innovations (UK) Ltd

Claimant

The May Fair Avenue General Trading LLC

Defendant

Moon City Star Property Investment LLC

Defendant

Mr Negm Abdelnaby Ibrahim Nasr

Defendant

City Star Trade Brokerage LLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Injunction (worldwide Freezing Order) / Return Date Hearing After Ex Parte Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant made full and frank disclosure in obtaining the ex parte worldwide freezing order
  2. 2 Whether there was material non-disclosure or misrepresentation justifying discharge of the injunction
  3. 3 Whether the claimant forged documents to support the injunction application

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to make full and frank disclosure, including misrepresenting the joint venture agreement, failing to disclose material payments and credit notes, making a bogus salary claim, and possibly forging documents. These breaches of duty of candour justified discharge of the worldwide freezing order regardless of the underlying merits.

Court Disposition

Worldwide freezing order discharged for material non-disclosure and lack of candour by the claimant.

Orders

  • Injunction discharged.
  • Parties to consider return of 29,000 bottles of fragrance to claimant and proceeds to be held in escrow pending account.