MANTRA DAO INC. AND ANOTHER v. JOHN PATRICK MULLIN AND OTHERS

MANTRA DAO INC. AND ANOTHER v. JOHN PATRICK MULLIN AND OTHERS

The balance of convenience favours granting a limited interlocutory accounts disclosure order because damages would be inadequate given Plaintiffs' lack of visibility of rapidly moving cryptocurrency assets, the order is non-disruptive and promotes proper accounting, confidentiality concerns can be managed by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] HKCFI 2099
Parties
1st Plaintiff: MANTRA DAO INC.; 2nd Plaintiff: RIODEFI INC.; 1st Defendant: JOHN PATRICK MULLIN; 2nd Defendant: WILLIAM DONOVAN JOHN CORKIN; 3rd Defendant: RODRIGO QUAN MIRANDA; 4th Defendant: JAYANT B RAMANAND; 5th Defendant: MD LABS LIMITED; 6th Defendant: TRITAURIAN CONSULTING LIMITED
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 August 2024
Case Number
HCA749/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Injunction / Interlocutory (accounts Disclosure Application)
Outcome
Accounts Disclosure Order granted on interlocutory basis
Legal Topics
Interim Disclosure of Accounts, Misappropriation, DAO Governance, Management and Employment Agreements, Protective Undertakings, Order for Account V Disclosure Order
Source Language
en
Equity Trusts and Fiduciary Duties Civil Procedure Corporate/governance Cryptocurrency/blockchain Interim Disclosure of Accounts Misappropriation DAO Governance +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MANTRA DAO INC.

1st Plaintiff

RIODEFI INC.

2nd Plaintiff

JOHN PATRICK MULLIN

1st Defendant

WILLIAM DONOVAN JOHN CORKIN

2nd Defendant

RODRIGO QUAN MIRANDA

3rd Defendant

JAYANT B RAMANAND

4th Defendant

MD LABS LIMITED

5th Defendant

TRITAURIAN CONSULTING LIMITED

6th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Injunction / Interlocutory (accounts Disclosure Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interlocutory accounts disclosure order should be granted
  2. 2 Whether Plaintiffs have a legitimate need for visibility of Project finances and whether damages are an adequate remedy
  3. 3 Whether disclosure would unfairly reveal confidential business information or trade secrets

Ratio Decidendi

The balance of convenience favours granting a limited interlocutory accounts disclosure order because damages would be inadequate given Plaintiffs' lack of visibility of rapidly moving cryptocurrency assets, the order is non-disruptive and promotes proper accounting, confidentiality concerns can be managed by protective undertakings to advisers, and the relief sought is a preservation/disclosure measure distinct from a final order for an account under Order 43 RHC.

Court Disposition

Accounts Disclosure Order granted on interlocutory basis

Orders

  • 1st to 4th Defendants to provide Plaintiffs with financial spreadsheets of the MANTRA DAO project in the agreed format from 1 January 2021 onwards
  • No more than three of the Plaintiffs' legal and financial advisers to receive supporting documents for entries in the financial spreadsheets subject to written undertakings not to disclose those documents to the Plaintiffs or any other parties without a court order