7/10/2020
START DATE
END DATE
24-Jul-20
Griffin Line General Trading LLC v Centaur Ventures Ltd
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
COMMERCIAL COURT
Hon. Chief Justice Narinder Hargun
Steven White and John McSweeney (Appleby Bermuda Limited) for the Plaintiff
Richard Horseman (Wakefield Quin Limited) for the Defendant
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Griffin Line applied for a freezing order against Centaur's assets due to a dispute over loan repayments. Centaur sought to set aside the injunction arguing Griffin Line did not present a good arguable case and failed to disclose material facts. The case centered around loan agreements made in 2016 with Griffin Line asserting that it lent Centaur a significant sum under two facility agreements which Centaur partially repaid. The dispute also involved an alleged forged amendment extending the repayment date which Centaur denied owing the full amount claimed. The court had to decide if there was a real risk of asset dissipation by Centaur and if Griffin Line had made a full and frank disclosure when obtaining the injunction
SUMMARY:
Griffin Line General Trading LLC
OUTCOMES:
Mareva injunction test for a good arguable claim effect of delay in making the application real risk of dissipation material nondisclosure
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
TBD
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Griffin Line General Trading LLC v Centaur Ventures Ltd
Griffin Line applied for a freezing order against Centaur's assets due to a dispute over loan repayments. Centaur sought to set aside the injunction arguing Griffin Line did not present a good arguable case and failed to disclose material facts. The case centered around loan agreements made in 2016 with Griffin Line asserting that it lent Centaur a significant sum under two facility agreements which Centaur partially repaid. The dispute also involved an alleged forged amendment extending the repayment date which Centaur denied owing the full amount claimed. The court had to decide if there was a real risk of asset dissipation by Centaur and if Griffin Line had made a full and frank disclosure when obtaining the injunction