DEVOY V GOLDEX INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED HC AK CIV-2012-404-1313

DEVOY V GOLDEX INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED HC AK CIV-2012-404-1313

The application for freezing orders was declined because the plaintiffs failed to establish a good arguable case against the third defendant: the pleadings and affidavits contained insufficient particulars of the third defendant's role or representations, and the defendant's denials via Russian counsel undermined any basis for ex parte freezing relief; thus the threshold for a freezing order was not met.

Citation
openlaw-3fd42a12_1833_4e20_8ec0_89e373ef83da.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: ELI DEVOY; Second Plaintiff: AKIKO ITO; Third Plaintiff: ALIREZI NOROUZY; Fourth Plaintiff: DANA OMIDVAR; Fifth Plaintiff: HASSAN AREFI; Sixth Plaintiff: SACHITO SHIOZAWA; Seventh Plaintiff: ZOHREH AZIMI; First Defendant: GOLDEX INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED; Second Defendant: HAJI ABD RAHMAN AWG HAJIDAMIT; Third Defendant: DEMIN SERGEY VLADIMIROVICH
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
21 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (freezing Order Application) / Without Notice Interim Application (declined)
Outcome
Application for freezing orders against the third defendant declined
Legal Topics
Freezing Order, Without Notice Relief, Dissipation of Assets, Good Arguable Case
Civil Procedure Injunctions Asset Preservation Contract Freezing Order Without Notice Relief Dissipation of Assets Good Arguable Case

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ELI DEVOY

First Plaintiff

AKIKO ITO

Second Plaintiff

ALIREZI NOROUZY

Third Plaintiff

DANA OMIDVAR

Fourth Plaintiff

HASSAN AREFI

Fifth Plaintiff

SACHITO SHIOZAWA

Sixth Plaintiff

ZOHREH AZIMI

Seventh Plaintiff

GOLDEX INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED

First Defendant

HAJI ABD RAHMAN AWG HAJIDAMIT

Second Defendant

DEMIN SERGEY VLADIMIROVICH

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (freezing Order Application) / Without Notice Interim Application (declined)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs have established a good arguable case against the third defendant
  2. 2 Whether assets exist within or outside the jurisdiction to which a freezing order can apply
  3. 3 Whether there is a real risk of dissipation of assets

Ratio Decidendi

The application for freezing orders was declined because the plaintiffs failed to establish a good arguable case against the third defendant: the pleadings and affidavits contained insufficient particulars of the third defendant's role or representations, and the defendant's denials via Russian counsel undermined any basis for ex parte freezing relief; thus the threshold for a freezing order was not met.

Court Disposition

Application for freezing orders against the third defendant declined

Orders

  • Application for freezing orders declined