CMOC Sales & Marketing Ltd v Person(s) Unknown & Ors

Where defendants have been properly served with proceedings and injunctions, but have neither engaged with the claim nor challenged the grounds for existing relief, the court may continue the injunctions. The usual duration is until trial or further order. An order extending relief until after enforcement should not be made prematurely where the appropriate time for considering further extension is after judgment. The court may also grant further disclosure-related orders where the evidence establishes no sufficient reason to withhold them.

The claimant sought continuation of injunctions and further relief against several cause of action defendants who had not engaged with the proceedings or provided required asset disclosure. The defendants had been served with the proceedings, the original and subsequent injunctions, and notice of the applications. The court also considered evidence concerning material disclosure, including matters addressed at earlier hearings and a recent order made by Mr Justice Teare.

The central issues were whether the existing injunctions should continue, the period for which they should remain in force, and whether the further disclosure and related orders should be made.

1. Continuation of injunctions. The court continued the existing injunctions in principle. The reasons for granting the original and subsequent without-notice injunctions remained applicable, and no defendant had sought to challenge them. The defendants’ continuing failure to engage did not prevent continuation of the relief.
2. Duration. The injunctions were continued until trial or further order, being the usual form of order. The court declined to continue them until after enforcement. If the defendants remained absent and judgment were later entered for the claimant, the court could then consider whether any extension was appropriate. If the defendants engaged, the position might become more complex.
3. Disclosure and related orders. The court took account of the evidence on material disclosure adduced at earlier hearings, the evidence recited at paragraph 121, the recent order of Mr Justice Teare, and updated evidence in Mr Young’s fourth affidavit. Nothing in that material caused concern about making the further orders sought, including the final part of the order.
4. The relevant relief and orders were therefore made, subject to the injunctions lasting until trial or further order.