A defendant sought to vary a Mareva injunction and Norwich order granted in connection with allegations of a fraudulent scheme involving the misappropriation of public funds earmarked for homelessness relief.
The defendant sought to exclude future income from the Mareva Order's scope, obtain monthly releases for living expenses and a one-time release for outstanding debts, remove the passport surrender requirement, and remove a phone number from the Norwich Order.
The court dismissed all aspects of the motion, finding the defendant had not met the required test for varying the Mareva Order due to lack of full and frank disclosure, and that the passport requirement and Norwich Order remained appropriate given the circumstances.
