How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Alex J. Your Own Question
Alex J.
Alex J., Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 3671
Experience:  Solicitors 2 years plus PQE
13113900
Type Your Law Question Here...
Alex J. is online now

Hello, Please could you answer this question regarding UK

Customer Question

Hello,
Please could you answer this question regarding UK Law.
Can an IBC (international business company) based in Malaysia but registered in Brunei, which has ceased trading and has no assets, litigate in the British High Court? And what would be the customer due diligence that would have to be performed by an English law firm to accept instruction and act for such a company.
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Alex J. replied 3 years ago.
Hi,
Thank you for your question and welcome.
My name is ***** ***** I will assist.
You can find an English Law firm that will act for you here - www.lawsociety.org.uk
Any law firm will need proof that the company exists and is a registered corporate entity and will need identification and proof of address for any beneficial owners of the company who control 25% or more of the voting share capital. They will also need identification and proof of address of the directors. A Malaysian Law Firm maybe able to verify this for an English law firm.
A High Court may accept jurisdiction of the dispute but it depends what it is over? Does the dispute relate to an English company? Also what does the contract that the dispute relates to say about jurisdiction?
Kind regards
AJ
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

First question. Can an IBC (international business company) based in malaysia but registered in brunei, which has ceased trading and has no assets, litigate in the british high court? And what would be the customer due diligence that would have to be performed by an english law firm to accept instruction and act for such a company. Reply received

Second question.

If a party engaged in litigation conceals a number of material facts, and their solicitor perpetuates the concealment, what recourse does the opposition in the litigation have.
In the case in question the claimant had a live damages claim (IP theft) against the defendant. The defendant company had its assets sold and ceased to trade and then had no assets. The defendant company was then represented in court and carried on defending the litigation, not revealing the change in status of the defendant company in court.
Had the change of status been revealed the claimant would have ceased legal action since there was no possibility of recovering any damages awarded. Significant legal costs have been accumulated as a result.
How does the claimant address this issue in court?

Expert:  Alex J. replied 2 years ago.
Hi
Thank you.
What happened to the proceeds of the sale of that company?
Was the company required to disclose what assets it had during the disclosure process?
Kind regards
AJ
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

Here is a question that we would like answered please.


 


We are involved in litigation with another company and they have provided multiple witness statements which appear to be contradictory.


 


A critical material fact is in doubt because of the following;


1. The witness states (in a witness statement) that he has sold the assets of his company and that the details of the transaction are included in a draft contract (which is appended) to the witness statement. The draft is unsigned but he confirms that this was signed and executed shortly afterwards.


2. If the contract is executed in the same wording as the draft the company has to enter into an MVL (Members Voluntary Liquidation)


3. In later statements they contend that the company is still in existence


4. Both statements can’t be true


 


The two questions arising are;


1. Is the content of an unsigned contract which the person says he later signed deemed to be a statement of fact?


2. What are the implications in the litigation process if a material fact, which is fundamental to the arguments is put into doubt by the oppositions contradictory witness statements?


a. And what are the options for us to address this, I presume, Contempt of Court