Read the full judgment text of HCCT 48/2002 on BabelCite. This 高等法院原訟法庭 judgment was delivered on 20 July 2002 before Deputy High Court Judge Saunders.
Procedure — Mareva Injunction — Continuation and validity of orders — Arbitration — Interim Award — Insolvency — Asset Dissipation — Evidence — Financial disclosure — Drafting errors in injunction orders — Good arguable case — Enforcement of arbitration awards. Discreet Limited and Global Island Investments Limited entered into a land sale and construction agreement, leading to arbitration over disputes. Global applied for a Mareva injunction to restrain asset dissipation by Discreet. After procedural irregularities and redrafting of injunction orders, the court held that the July 6 injunction order was valid and capable of being continued. The court applied the test for Mareva injunctions, noting that solid evidence of real risk of dissipation and insolvency existed, including undervalue sale of property before arbitration and incomplete financial disclosure. The arbitrator had issued an interim award against Discreet, creating a prima facie good arguable case for enforcement. The Mareva injunction was accordingly continued, and costs reserved.
Legal issues: Continuation of Mareva injunction · Jurisdiction and basis for granting Mareva injunction
Outcome: The Mareva injunction granted by Suffiad J on 6 July and amended on 12 July was continued until further order of the Court.