Assaf v Skalkos

The case of Assaf v Skalkos involved a dispute over the distribution of assets from the sale of a property. The primary parties were Assaf, the appellant, and Skalkos, the respondent. The dispute arose following the conclusion of litigation between the two parties, where Assaf sought an order to prevent Skalkos from disposing of assets derived from the sale of a property. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the Mareva order, which restrained Skalkos from disposing of the assets, could be maintained post-litigation and whether the order was justified given the circumstances. The court had to determine whether the conditions necessary to grant such an order were still applicable after the conclusion of the primary litigation, and if the risk of dissipation of assets was still present.

The court ruled that the Mareva order could not be maintained after the conclusion of the litigation. It found that the primary purpose of the Mareva order, to prevent the dissipation of assets during the pendency of litigation, was no longer relevant once the litigation had concluded. The court emphasised that the order was exceptional in nature and should only be granted when the risk of dissipation was immediate and substantial. Since the litigation had concluded, the risk of dissipation was no longer immediate, leading to the conclusion that the order should be discharged. The court noted that any further claims regarding the distribution of the assets should be pursued through standard legal processes rather than through the maintenance of the Mareva order.

The final orders of the court included the discharge of the Mareva order and directions for the parties to address the remaining issues regarding the distribution of the assets through the appropriate legal channels.