MOGILIN & Anor v JO & Anor [2013] NZHC 1345

MOGILIN & Anor v JO & Anor [2013] NZHC 1345

The first defendant's deportation constituted a material change of circumstances undermining the prior finding that the defendants were not flight risks; accordingly the Court may make targeted interim disclosure orders limited to assets within New Zealand to ascertain present facts relevant to freezing relief, while declining to commence offshore tracing or further broad discovery pending amendment of pleadings; the trial judge recused himself from the trial due to a connection with a proposed witness.

Citation
[2013] NZHC 1345
Parties
First Plaintiff: Anatoly Mogilin; Second Plaintiff: Marfa (Masha) Mogilin; First Defendant: Nam Geun Jo; Second Defendant: Martina Jho
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
7 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil (property/joint Venture/dispute) / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Freezing Order and Ancillary Relief (interim Judgment)
Outcome
Interim orders made for focused disclosure of New Zealand assets; no broad offshore discovery ordered; further discovery deferred pending amended pleadings; trial judge recused.
Legal Topics
Freezing Order, Ancillary Discovery, Contempt for Misleading Affidavit, Jurisdictional Limits, Recusal
Civil Procedure Property Law Restraint of Assets Contempt Discovery Immigration/deportation Implications Freezing Order Ancillary Discovery +3 more

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anatoly Mogilin

First Plaintiff

Marfa (Masha) Mogilin

Second Plaintiff

Nam Geun Jo

First Defendant

Martina Jho

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (property/joint Venture/dispute) / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Freezing Order and Ancillary Relief (interim Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing order should be extended in light of the first defendant's deportation
  2. 2 Whether ancillary discovery of bank accounts and assets in New Zealand should be ordered
  3. 3 Whether the first defendant committed contempt by filing an affidavit that omitted material facts about deportation risk and by refusing to waive privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant's deportation constituted a material change of circumstances undermining the prior finding that the defendants were not flight risks; accordingly the Court may make targeted interim disclosure orders limited to assets within New Zealand to ascertain present facts relevant to freezing relief, while declining to commence offshore tracing or further broad discovery pending amendment of pleadings; the trial judge recused himself from the trial due to a connection with a proposed witness.

Court Disposition

Interim orders made for focused disclosure of New Zealand assets; no broad offshore discovery ordered; further discovery deferred pending amended pleadings; trial judge recused.

Orders

  • Respondents to disclose all bank accounts in New Zealand in their name or under their control, identifying account type and current balances
  • Respondents to disclose whereabouts of the yacht "Volente", whether it is registered and in whose name it is registered