Cave v Cave [2019] NIFam 6 (08 March 2019)
The injunction was discharged because the petitioner failed to make full and candid disclosure, misrepresented the respondent's undertakings, and omitted relevant documents; the court found that the risk alleged was unfounded as the undertakings had been honoured.
- Citation
- [2019] NIFam 6
- Parties
- Petitioner: Mrs Cave; Respondent: Mr Cave
- Jurisdiction
- Northern Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 08 March 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Mareva Injunction / Post Injunction, Inter Parties Hearing
- Outcome
- Mareva Injunction discharged; costs awarded to respondent
- Legal Topics
- Mareva Injunction, Ex Parte Orders, Duty of Candour, Disclosure Obligations, Division of Matrimonial Assets
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mrs Cave
Petitioner
Mr Cave
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Mareva Injunction / Post Injunction, Inter Parties Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner failed in her duty of candour when seeking an ex-parte injunction
- 2 Whether procedural flaws and misrepresentation justify setting aside the injunction
- 3 Whether there was a proper basis for the injunction
Ratio Decidendi
The injunction was discharged because the petitioner failed to make full and candid disclosure, misrepresented the respondent's undertakings, and omitted relevant documents; the court found that the risk alleged was unfounded as the undertakings had been honoured.
Court Disposition
Mareva Injunction discharged; costs awarded to respondent
Orders
- Mareva Injunction discharged
- Costs awarded to respondent to be taxed in default of agreement
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