The plaintiff employer brought a motion to continue a Mareva injunction freezing the assets of its former employee, who was alleged to have participated in a kickback scheme in Cuba resulting in over $500,000 in misappropriated funds.
The defendant opposed the motion, arguing material non-disclosure and lack of risk of asset dissipation.
The court applied the five-part test for a Mareva injunction and found the plaintiff established a strong prima facie case and sufficient risk of dissipation, ordering the injunction to continue.
