MOGILIN & Anor V JO & Anor HC AK CIV-2011-404-001584

MOGILIN & Anor V JO & Anor HC AK CIV-2011-404-001584

Court dismissed most of the plaintiffs' applications for particular discovery for lack of sufficient grounds to believe undisclosed relevant documents existed, but directed limited discovery relating to documents about the yacht (notably insurance) and ordered defendants to supply already-collected builder documents; ordered security for costs of NZD 25,000 payable in two tranches, transferred the proceedings to the Christchurch registry, dismissed contempt proceedings, and directed a case management conference and costs memoranda.

Citation
openlaw-04aa06bf_2faf_43b7_a272_bb53b2bb62b1.pdf
Parties
First Plaintiff: Anatoly Mogilin; Second Plaintiff: Marfa Mogilin; First Defendant: Nam Guen Jo; Second Defendant: Martina Jho
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
13 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract, Equity, Trust) / Interlocutory Hearing (particular Discovery, Security for Costs, Venue and Contempt Applications)
Outcome
Interlocutory judgment: plaintiffs' particular discovery application largely dismissed; limited discovery ordered regarding yacht documents (insurance) and defendants to provide specific disclosed documents; security for costs ordered; venue changed to Christchurch; contempt application dismissed; case management...
Legal Topics
Pre Contractual Misrepresentation, Fraud, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Constructive Trust, Particular Discovery (hcr 8.19), Security for Costs, Change of Venue, Contempt for Non Disclosure
Contract Equity Trusts Property Civil Procedure Pre Contractual Misrepresentation Fraud Breach of Fiduciary Duty +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 Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anatoly Mogilin

First Plaintiff

Marfa Mogilin

Second Plaintiff

Nam Guen Jo

First Defendant

Martina Jho

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract, Equity, Trust) / Interlocutory Hearing (particular Discovery, Security for Costs, Venue and Contempt Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants failed to make particular discovery under r 8.19
  2. 2 Whether transactions should be set aside for misrepresentation, fraud, unconscionability or breach of trust/fiduciary duty
  3. 3 Whether security for costs should be ordered under r 5.45

Ratio Decidendi

Court dismissed most of the plaintiffs' applications for particular discovery for lack of sufficient grounds to believe undisclosed relevant documents existed, but directed limited discovery relating to documents about the yacht (notably insurance) and ordered defendants to supply already-collected builder documents; ordered security for costs of NZD 25,000 payable in two tranches, transferred the proceedings to the Christchurch registry, dismissed contempt proceedings, and directed a case management conference and costs memoranda.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory judgment: plaintiffs' particular discovery application largely dismissed; limited discovery ordered regarding yacht documents (insurance) and defendants to provide specific disclosed documents; security for costs ordered; venue changed to Christchurch; contempt application dismissed; case management...

Orders

  • Application for particular discovery largely dismissed (Appendix A categories dismissed except as specified).
  • Defendants to provide copies of 299 documents relating to the Chernishoff claim (as already obtained) to plaintiffs.