SMA Investment Holdings Ltd v Harbour Fund II LP & Ors
[2023] EWHC 428 (Comm)
Tonstate Group Limited & Ors v Edward Wojakovski & Ors
14 May 2024
[2024] EWHC 1551 (Ch)
High Court
The judge let a non-lawyer help a defendant in court because of his health and the serious situation. He refused to delay the case further because the defendant wasn't cooperating and needed to find the stolen money quickly. Finally, the judge allowed the case to go after another person possibly involved in hiding the money.
Key Facts
- •Application for Mr. Michael Marx to exercise rights of audience for Defendant, Mr. Edward Wojakovski.
- •Disclosure order against Mr. Wojakovski to locate misappropriated funds.
- •Mr. Wojakovski's previous contempt of court conviction and suspended sentence.
- •Concerns regarding Mr. Wojakovski's health and cognitive function.
- •Application for adjournment of disclosure application by Mr. Wojakovski.
- •Application for permission to serve out of jurisdiction against Mr. Gil Wojakovski and Mr. Tuvia Lewkovicz under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 for alleged fraudulent transaction.
Legal Principles
Exercise of rights of audience is ordinarily reserved for legally qualified and regulated individuals.
Practice Note (McKenzie Friends: Civil and Family Courts) [2010] 1 WLR 1881
Service out of jurisdiction requires a good arguable case, a serious issue to be tried, England as the forum conveniens, and a sufficient connection to the jurisdiction.
Orexim Trading Limited v Mahavir Port & Terminal Private Limited [2019] 1 All ER (Comm) 15
Section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 allows claims to set aside transactions entered into with a view to defrauding creditors.
Insolvency Act 1986, Section 423
Outcomes
Mr. Marx permitted to exercise rights of audience for Mr. Wojakovski.
Exceptional circumstances due to the importance of the application and concerns about Mr. Wojakovski's health and ability to represent himself effectively.
Mr. Wojakovski's application for adjournment refused.
Insufficient justification for further adjournment; urgency in locating misappropriated funds; failure to secure legal representation despite sufficient time; non-compliance with previous court orders.
Permission granted for service out against Mr. Gil Wojakovski and Mr. Tuvia Lewkovicz.
Good arguable case under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986; serious issue to be tried due to suspicious timing of asset transfer; England is the forum conveniens; sufficient connection to the jurisdiction.
Similar Cases
L & S Accounting Firm Umbrella Limited v Idusogie Laurel Oronsaye & Ors
[2024] EWHC 2315 (Ch)
Tonstate Group Limited (in liquidation) & Ors v Edward Wojakovski & Ors
[2024] EWHC 975 (Ch)
Anthony James Broom v Maria Del Pilar Molina Aguilar
[2024] EWHC 1764 (Ch)
Seaton Management Limited v Stephen Henry Evans-Jones
[2024] EWHC 1883 (Ch)