Background: Lisa McKay sought a Mareva injunction against Geoffrey Rayjay Sidhu, Abtar Shar Sidhu, and Bracetek Industries Group Ltd. She alleged fraudulent investment schemes and misrepresentations.

Claims: McKay's application centered on claims of fraudulent activities by the defendants, seeking to freeze their assets to prevent dissipation.

Defendants' Response: Geoffrey Sidhu opposed the injunction, arguing McKay did not disclose material facts and failed to establish a prima facie case.

Court's Decision: The court set aside the interim Mareva injunction issued on October 18, 2023. The decision was based on the evaluation of the evidence and legal principles pertaining to such injunctions.

Costs Awarded: The court ruled that the costs of both the ex parte hearing and the continued hearing on January 10-11, 2024, would be in the cause, meaning they are to be determined as part of the overall litigation process, rather than being awarded to a specific party at this stage??.

Conclusion: The case highlights the complexity of litigation involving allegations of fraud and the legal standards required for granting Mareva injunctions. The resolution of costs and further legal proceedings are pending as part of the ongoing litigation process.