Lamont v Malishus Limited (NZ) and Ors (No.2)

The applicant, Lamont, sought freezing orders against the respondents, Malishus Limited (NZ) and others. The dispute concerned allegations of trade mark infringement. The application was heard by Judge Manousaridis.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant had a good arguable case for relief based on trade mark infringement, and whether there was a danger that the respondents would deal with their assets in a way that would frustrate any judgment the applicant might obtain. Additionally, the second and third respondents applied to dismiss the proceeding as an abuse of process, which also required the court to consider whether the applicant had a good arguable case.

His Honour found that the applicant did have a good arguable case for trade mark infringement. However, in light of undertakings provided by two of the five respondents regarding their assets, the court concluded there was no present danger of assets being misapplied to frustrate a potential judgment. Consequently, the application for freezing orders was dismissed on those terms. The application to dismiss the proceeding as an abuse of process was also dismissed, but on the condition that the applicant file an amended application and statement of claim removing the fourth respondent as a party.