Snell -v- Beadle 7-Nov-2006 [2006] JRC 157A (07 November 2006)
The injunction restraining assets lapsed on 1 January 2005. The court accepts the defendants' undertaking to retain five properties and £300,000 paid into court as sufficient security, allowing release of the Viberts' client account funds, as this balance protects the plaintiff's interests without unnecessary restraint.
- Citation
- [2006] JRC 157A
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Plaintiff; Defendant: Defendants
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 07 November 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Injunction/summons / Post Judgment, Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Injunction lapsed; court accepts defendants' undertaking as to security for claim.
- Legal Topics
- Asset Restraint, Security for Judgment, Undertakings, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Plaintiff
Plaintiff
Defendants
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Injunction/summons / Post Judgment, Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the injunction restraining defendants' assets should continue pending appeal
- 2 Whether the security offered by the defendants is sufficient to protect the plaintiff's interests
Ratio Decidendi
The injunction restraining assets lapsed on 1 January 2005. The court accepts the defendants' undertaking to retain five properties and £300,000 paid into court as sufficient security, allowing release of the Viberts' client account funds, as this balance protects the plaintiff's interests without unnecessary restraint.
Court Disposition
Injunction lapsed; court accepts defendants' undertaking as to security for claim.
Orders
- Defendants to retain five properties and £300,000 paid into court as security.
- Defendants permitted to use funds in Viberts' client account for legal fees and expenses.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment