CL-2015-000047 - [2025] EWHC 1837 (Comm)

Fecha: 18-Jul-2025

SUGGESTED RELEVANCE OF THE DISHONESTY ALLEGATIONS

(C)

SUGGESTED RELEVANCE OF THE DISHONESTY ALLEGATIONS

18.

The Defendants submit that, in addition to the foreseeability and jurisdiction cost issues mentioned above, the dishonesty allegations are relevant, and/or should in any event be allowed to continue, for the following reasons. The allegations are said to be relevant to the following matters in issue:

whether the freezing order was wrongly granted, which formally remains in issue on the statements of case, at least as between D5 and the Claimants;

ii)

the failure of the Defendants’ application to set aside the freezing order;

iii)

the Claimants’ conduct in policing of the freezing order and the losses caused by their allegedly aggressive policing of it;

iv)

the Claimants’ argument that, by way of mitigation, D5 should have sought the Claimants’ agreement to an appropriate variation of the freezing order;

questions of causation;

vi)

whether the Defendants were obliged to take reasonable steps to mitigate any losses otherwise caused by the freezing order;

vii)

the Defendants’ claims for injury to their reputation, distress caused to them and their families, and hence their claims for aggravated damages;

viii)

the Defendants’ claims for compound interest and costs on the indemnity basis; and

ix)

certain prospective applications which D5 may make.

19.

In addition, the Defendants submit that it is in the public interest, and part of the necessary vindication of their rights, for the dishonesty allegations to be determined.