WFO—contempt, costs and the cross-undertaking (Mex Group Worldwide Ltd v Ford)
Dispute Resolution analysis: The unusual circumstances of this case provided opportunity for the court to address key principles relevant to worldwide freezing orders (WFOs), contempt and cross-undertakings in damages. The WFO in question had been improperly obtained and discharged against certain defendants following the claimant’s, Mex Group Worldwide Ltd (MGWL’s), material non-disclosures coming to light. However, two defendants had not sought its discharge and were found in contempt for failing to comply with the WFO’s asset disclosure requirements. By way of this judgment, the court considered the penalty for contempt against those defendants, the overall costs of the action (including various applications) and enforcement of the cross-undertaking, with the judge finding sufficient evidence of loss to order an inquiry into damages. Overall, the court affirmed both the importance of full and frank disclosure and the ‘usual’ consequences when an interim injunction has been wrongly made, as well as emphasising that even improperly obtained WFOs must be obeyed until discharged. Practical implications written by Lauren Godfrey of Gatehouse Chambers.