Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
World Wide Mareva Injunctions (Dadourian Group Internationa Inc (Question…
World Wide Mareva Injunctions
Introduction
Courts must be reluctnt to exercise an extra-territial jurisdiction
QU: whether or not courts, if they make an extra-territorial MI would be exceeding territorial limits of their jurisdiction
Now well estab: THE COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION TO GRANT A WORLD-WIDE MI
i
Deutsche Bank v Murtagh
Costello J accepted that the courts in Ireland enjoy similar jurisdiction
HOWEVER- one month later in ICountyglen v Carway: HC remarked MI should be restricted to assets within court's jursdiction
obiter
Republic of Haiti v Duvalier
: WMI granted
C of A stressed cirucmstances this would be appropriate=rare
Enforcing a WMI
P will have to go through the apporpirate legal channels in the foreign jurisdiction in order to enforce it in that jurisidction
seeking and obtaining the permission of a court in that jursidction to enforce the WMI
Oppression a number of proceedings in foreign jurisdictions might cause to the D
responsibility of the court that grants a WMI to control such oppression
Dadourian Group Internationa Inc
Question for C of A: In waht circumstances is it appropriate for domestic court to grant permission to enforce a WMI aborad?
Arden LJ set out following practical guidelines
Guideline 1:
The principle applying to the grant of permission enforcing a WMI abroad
is tht the grant of permission should be just and conveninet for the purpose of ensuring the effeciveness of the WMI
and in addition that it is not oppressive to the parties to the English proceedngs or to third parties
Need to strike balance between:
effectiveness v not oppressive to Ds
Guideline 3:
The interests of the applicant should be balanced against the interests of the other parties to the proceedings and any new party likely to be joined to the foreign proceeding
Guideline 2:
All relevant circumstances and options need to be considered
Allows the court to grant permission to enforce WMI subject to terms
Guideline 4: Permission should not normally be given in terms that would enable the applicant to relief in teh foreign proceedings superior to the relief given by the WMI
Guideline 5: Evidence in support of the applicaion for permission shoudl contain all the information necessary to make the judge reach an informed decision
including evidence as to applicable law and practice in foreign court, evidence as to nature of any proposed proceedings and evidence as to teh assets bleived to be located in the jurisdiction
Guideline 6: the standard of proof as to the existence of assets that are both within the WMI and within the jurisdicition of the foreign court is a real prospect- that is the applicant must show there is a real prospect that such assets are located within the jurisdiciton of the foreign court in qu
Guideline 7:
There must be evidence of a risk of dissipation of the assets in qu
Question 8: Noramlly the application should be made on notice to the respondent, but in cases of urgency, where it is just to do so, the permission may be given without notice to the party against whom relief will be sought in the foreign proceedings but that party should have the earliest practiable opporutnity of having the matter reconsidered by the court at a hearing of which he is given notice
REMAINS TO BE SEEN WHETHER OR NOT COURTS IN IE WILL ENDORSE THE GUIDLINES ENUNCIATED