top of page

6/26/2019

START DATE

END DATE

7/12/2019

W.E.R. vs. C.L.M.R.

COURT:

LAW:

JUDGE(S):

CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:

DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:

Supreme Court of Bermuda

DIVORCE JURISDICTION

Hon. Chief Justice Hargun

Ms Jackie MacLellan (Petitioner)

Mr Cameron Hill (Respondent)

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The Respondent sought a freezing order against the Petitioner alleging misrepresentation of assets in a Consent Order from December 2012

SUMMARY:

The validity of the ex parte freezing order adequacy of asset disclosure and the use of potentially stolen confidential documents

OUTCOMES:

The ex parte Order was discharged due to failure of full and fair disclosure by the Respondent

RULED IN FAVOUR OF:

Defendant

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: 

pdf.png
AI Chatbox Anchor

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

W.E.R. vs. C.L.M.R.

The Respondent sought a freezing order against the Petitioner alleging misrepresentation of assets in a Consent Order from December 2012

bottom of page