15 Jul 2015
DAVID PAUL STEICKE v. RAYMOND GATT AND OTHERS
- Citation
- DAVID PAUL STEICKE v. RAYMOND GATT AND OTHERS
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCA1095/2015
Paragraph 1(9)(ii) of the ex parte Interim Preservation and Inspection Order dated 3 July 2015 was set aside because it was obtained in circumstances where the judge was not informed that Order 29 rule 2(5) required notice (so the ex parte route was improper), the provision operated as an intrusive Mareva‑style restraint preventing normal business use of funds, the order lacked sufficient clarity and precision as to the money to be preserved, there was insufficient risk of dissipation to justify such an oppressive order given the parties' history and delay by the plaintiff, and an adequate re…