header-logo header-logo

Court misled

26 March 2015
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The High Court has taken the unusual step of criticising a sovereign state as well as the conduct of a solicitor, in the high-profile application to discharge a worldwide freezing order of the $100m assets of businessman Abdourahman Boreh.

The Republic of Djibouti claimed that Boreh made improper gains and was involved in a terrorist attack in the state, both denied by Boreh. However, evidence showed that transcripts and phone calls relied on in the case were incorrectly dated and did not implicate Boreh. This was known to the claimants and their solicitor, Peter Gray of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, before the freezing order application was made.

The court discharged the freezing order, finding that Gray and the claimants had deliberately and dishonestly misled the court, in Boreh v Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm).

Issue: 7646 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll