JEWRIM LTD AND ANOTHER v. S&C LTD AND ANOTHER

JEWRIM LTD AND ANOTHER v. S&C LTD AND ANOTHER

The injunction was discharged because the foreign proceedings no longer supported the relief and the applicants had deliberately failed to make material disclosure at the ex parte stage concerning the creditor status (locus) which was central to the claims; as a result costs were awarded to the 1st Defendant on an indemnity basis and summarily assessed at HK$900,000.

Citation
[2020] HKCFI 1983
Parties
1st Plaintiff: JEWRIM LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: OLEG VALERIEVICH DROZDOV; 1st Defendant: S&C LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: TATIANA ANDREEVNA GRUSHINA
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 August 2020
Case Number
HCMP2724/2017
Procedural Posture
Interim Relief Application Under Section 21 M High Court Ordinance in Aid of Foreign (russian) Proceedings / Substantive Hearing on Continuation of Mareva Injunction and Discharge Summons
Outcome
Injunction discharged; costs awarded to 1st Defendant on an indemnity basis assessed at HK$900,000
Legal Topics
Interim Relief, Full and Frank Disclosure, Costs (indemnity), Provisional Measures, Locus/creditor Status
Source Language
EN
Civil Procedure Injunctions (freezing/mareva) Private International Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Bankruptcy Law Interim Relief Full and Frank Disclosure Costs (indemnity) +2 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JEWRIM LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

OLEG VALERIEVICH DROZDOV

2nd Plaintiff

S&C LIMITED

1st Defendant

TATIANA ANDREEVNA GRUSHINA

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Relief Application Under Section 21 M High Court Ordinance in Aid of Foreign (russian) Proceedings / Substantive Hearing on Continuation of Mareva Injunction and Discharge Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Hong Kong Mareva injunction should be continued in aid of Russian proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the applicants made full and frank disclosure of material facts (in particular the creditor status/locus issue) at the ex parte stage
  3. 3 Whether there was a continuing good arguable case and real risk of dissipation

Ratio Decidendi

The injunction was discharged because the foreign proceedings no longer supported the relief and the applicants had deliberately failed to make material disclosure at the ex parte stage concerning the creditor status (locus) which was central to the claims; as a result costs were awarded to the 1st Defendant on an indemnity basis and summarily assessed at HK$900,000.

Court Disposition

Injunction discharged; costs awarded to 1st Defendant on an indemnity basis assessed at HK$900,000

Orders

  • Injunction Order discharged forthwith
  • Costs of and occasioned by the Continuation Summons and the Discharge Summons to be paid forthwith by the Plaintiffs to the 1st Defendant on an indemnity basis; total costs summarily assessed at HK$900,000