SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 MarsdenLR 250

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
GEORGE PATHMANATHAN MICHAEL GANDHI NATHAN – Appellant
Versus
PORTCULLIS INTERNATIONAL LTD & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. application for injunction to prevent fund dissipation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. justification for mareva injunctions. (Para 3)
3. background on shareholding and consent order. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. criteria for granting mareva injunction laid out. (Para 10 , 11)
5. court finds real risk of asset dissipation based on conduct. (Para 12)

[1] The 1st and 2nd Respondents' application is for the following orders:-

(i) an order restraining the Petitioner, Portcullis Trustnet (Labuan) Ltd and the 3rd Respondent, whether by themselves or through their directors, officers, nominees or agents whosoever, from uplifting, transferring, disposing, removing and/or dissipating the monies USD821,034.09 (as per the Statement of Account dated 8 July 2016) ("the monies") held in a time deposit by Portcullis Trustnet (Labuan) Ltd pursuant to a Consent Order dated 8 September 2015;

(ii) an order restraining the Petitioner, Portcullis Trustnet (Labuan) Ltd and the 3rd Respondent, whether by themselves or through their directors, officers, nominees or agents whosoever, from entering into any transactions, arrangement or agreement involving the monies;

(iii) an order restraining the Petitioner,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top