SG (an Entity Established Under Turkish Law) v BI (A private BVI Company) et Al

• Jurisdiction: Cayman Islands
• Judge: Levers J.
• Judgment Date: 16 December 2004
• Court: Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
• Docket Number: 478 of 2004
• Date: 16 December 2004

SG (An Entity Established Under Turkish Law)

and

BI (A private BVI Company) et al

Levers, J.

478 of 2004

Grand Court

Civil Practice and Procedure - Breach of an injunction through the sale of a vessel — Contempt — Failure to provide full and frank disclosure — Security for costs.

Appearances:

Counsel for the plaintiff: Alistair Walters and Martin Jones of Campbells Counsel for the 1st & 2nd defendants: Nigel Sanders of Walkers Counsel for 3rd defendant: Hector Robinson of Quin & Hampson Counsel for the 4th defendant: Douglas Schofield

Levers J.

1 The plaintiff by way of ex parte summons applied for an injunction to prevent the registration of mortgages over two vessels in favour of the Third defendant. The court granted the injunction, restraining all parties including the plaintiff from dealing with the vessels. The vessels are registered in the Cayman Islands albeit the plaintiff and the vessels are physically in Turkey. The first and second defendants are BVI registered companies and the Third defendant is a Jordanian national. The plaintiff invoked the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands well knowing that proceedings to deal with the vessels were well underway in Turkey. The court granted the injunction to preserve the status quo. The defendants were joined in this matter by the plaintiff.

2 In breach of the injunction, the plaintiff sold one of the vessels and the defendants have now taken out a summons seeking various forms of relief. I must now however deal with the issue of contempt. The plaintiff has filed an affidavit admitting the contempt but praying in mitigation that various acts of fraud were committed by the defendants and that a Turkish court order mandated the sale. There was not a scintilla of documentary evidence to support the plaintiff's case. I am mindful of the authorities presented to me, in particular Omrod, L.J.'s statement in Ansah v. Ansah [1977] (Family 138 at 144) and the fact that a public entity and the public may be interested in this matter. However, the behaviour of the plaintiff and the continued likelihood to commit contempt is so blatant that the defendants are entitled in the circumstances to relief over and above the norm from this court. I therefore rule as follows:

1

The monies realized in the sale of one of the vessels is to be paid into the courts of the Cayman Islands or to be held in escrow in an independent country where both the defendants and the...