Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Asset disclosure for prospective attachment may be ordered from the commencement of foreign proceedings where the period is undisputed; disclosure identifies assets and does not decide whether they are attachable. Certified foreign judgments carry a mandatory presumption of competent jurisdiction under the CPC, which must be rebutted by credible evidence rather than disagreement with findings or bare reliance on statutory exceptions. Prior anti-enforcement proceedings and findings concerning diversion of assets supported the disclosure and restraint directions. Appellate intervention in interlocutory discretion is limited to arbitrary, capricious, perverse, or legally erroneous exercises of discretion; a reasonably possible first-instance view should not be replaced. The disclosure and restraint directions were maintained and the appeal dismissed.
Asset disclosure for prospective attachment may be ordered from the commencement of foreign proceedings where the period is undisputed; disclosure identifies assets and does not decide whether they are attachable. Certified foreign judgments carry a mandatory presumption of competent jurisdiction under the CPC, which must be rebutted by credible evidence rather than disagreement with findings or bare reliance on statutory exceptions. Prior anti-enforcement proceedings and findings concerning diversion of assets supported the disclosure and restraint directions. Appellate intervention in interlocutory discretion is limited to arbitrary, capricious, perverse, or legally erroneous exercises of discretion; a reasonably possible first-instance view should not be replaced. The disclosure and restraint directions were maintained and the appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
