RHONDA JEANINE POHN v. MAC RICHARD POHN AND OTHERS

RHONDA JEANINE POHN v. MAC RICHARD POHN AND OTHERS

The application was dismissed because the 1st defendant failed the mandatory first hurdle: he did not make full and frank disclosure of his available assets and failed to account for the c. US$1.3m withdrawn; having previously consented to continuation of the injunction and with no material change, variation was not justified; therefore the injunction remains and the application is dismissed with costs nisi against the 1st defendant.

Citation
RHONDA JEANINE POHN v. MAC RICHARD POHN AND OTHERS
Parties
Plaintiff; Special Administrator of the Estate of Maxwell Pohn (deceased): Rhonda Jeanine Pohn; 1st Defendant: Mac Richard Pohn; 2nd Defendant: Leeward Enterprises Limited; 3rd Defendant: Goldern International Limited
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
12 March 2015
Case Number
HCA1381/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Proprietary Injunction Arising From Alleged Trust/beneficial Ownership Dispute / Application to Vary/revoke Interlocutory Proprietary Injunction at Pre Trial (trial Scheduled 27 May 2015)
Outcome
Application dismissed; interlocutory proprietary injunction maintained until trial
Legal Topics
Proprietary Injunction, Variation of Injunction, Beneficial Ownership, Dissipation of Assets, Full and Frank Disclosure, Legal Costs Funding, Maintenance Payments
Source Language
EN
Civil Equity Trusts Injunctions Company Law Probate/estate Proprietary Injunction Variation of Injunction +5 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rhonda Jeanine Pohn

Plaintiff; Special Administrator of the Estate of Maxwell Pohn (deceased)

Mac Richard Pohn

1st Defendant

Leeward Enterprises Limited

2nd Defendant

Goldern International Limited

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Proprietary Injunction Arising From Alleged Trust/beneficial Ownership Dispute / Application to Vary/revoke Interlocutory Proprietary Injunction at Pre Trial (trial Scheduled 27 May 2015)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interlocutory proprietary injunction should be varied or revoked to permit release of restrained assets for defendant's maintenance and legal costs
  2. 2 Whether the 1st defendant made full and frank disclosure of available assets as required when seeking release of restrained assets
  3. 3 Whether the 1st defendant dissipated or accounted for US$1.3 million withdrawn from the 2nd defendant's account

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the 1st defendant failed the mandatory first hurdle: he did not make full and frank disclosure of his available assets and failed to account for the c. US$1.3m withdrawn; having previously consented to continuation of the injunction and with no material change, variation was not justified; therefore the injunction remains and the application is dismissed with costs nisi against the 1st defendant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; interlocutory proprietary injunction maintained until trial

Orders

  • Application by 1st defendant to vary/revoke injunction dismissed
  • Costs order nisi: 1st defendant to pay the costs of this application including the hearing on 27 January 2015 to the plaintiff in any event