believing the defendants have assets here. I think that this requirement was put too high in the unreported case of MBPXL

Corpn v Intercontinental Banking Corpn (1975) Court of Appeal Transcript 411. In most cases the plaintiff will not know the extent of the assets. He will only have indications of them. The existence of a bank account in England is enough, whether it is in overdraft or not. (iv) The plaintiff should give some grounds for believing that there is a risk of the assets being removed before the judgment or award is satisfied. The mere fact that the defendant is abroad is not by itself sufficient....(v) The plaintiffs must, of course, give an undertaking in damages, in case they fail in their claim or the injunction turns out to be unjustified." 8. Mr Brown also relied on the defendant's affidavit of discovery and in particular the following:

1. the defendant swore that she did not have any funds in any bank accounts either within or without the Northern Territory of Australia;
2. the defendant swore that she operated a Visa Card issued by the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited; that

the credit limit on the card was $3500.00 and that at the present time she owed $3514.18; 3. that the defendant swore that her only asset within the Territory was the residential property at 33 Robinson Road, Millner, of which she was the registered proprietor. That property was valued at $121,000.00 (to which the defendant annexed a copy of a recent valuation) and was subject to two registered mortgages, the first in favour of the Australian Central Credit Union Limited pursuant to which the defendant presently owed $38,885.83 and the second in favour of Australian Guarantee Corporation Limited in respect of which the defendant presently owed $35,931.17; 4. the defendant swore that apart from her clothes and personal effects, she did not own any other assets in Darwin, Thailand or any other country. 9. In substance, Mr Brown's submission was that there was no evidence that the defendant had any other assets other than her interest in the home and there was no evidence that she had done anything to dispose of her interest in that asset. 10. It is necessary to briefly canvass the nature of the allegations that the plaintiff has made in his affidavit filed in support of the granting of the original Mareva injunction. 11. The plaintiff, who is 42 years of age, is a divorcee. He resides alone in The Narrows. He first met the defendant on 7 October 1993. The defendant is a prostitute, and the plaintiff engaged her services. Thereafter he continued to see the defendant in her capacity as a prostitute on several occasions in October of 1993. The next occasion that he saw her was on 13 October 1993. On that occasion the defendant told the plaintiff that her mother lived in Thailand and that her mother had a Diabetes related illness which had become complicated by a fall into a Thai style toilet. This resulted in multiple amputations of her mother's leg due to infection. There had been a number of operations and considerable hospitalisation and treatment. The defendant said that she had come to Darwin from Melbourne approximately 4 months ago, and had lived in Australia for approximately 4 years. She told the plaintiff that she had left Thailand to earn money to pay a large debt which she had incurred in Thailand in order to meet the costs of her mother's operations. She said that her father was employed taking photos of tourists feeding monkeys in Thailand. She said that prior to coming to Darwin she had formed a relationship with a businessman in Melbourne who had provided some assistance in paying off this debt. This relationship had broken down and as she had no family in Darwin she came here in order to work as a prostitute without them finding out. She said that she was single and staying with a Thai friend in Stuart Park but could not disclose her exact address under the laws governing escort agencies. 12. The plaintiff claimed that these statements were made to him on a number of occasions during October 1993. The plaintiff claimed that on one occasion the defendant had pulled out a small notepad from her handbag which contained a list of the debts that she said that she owed in Darwin, totalling an amount of some $16,000.00. She told the plaintiff that the money had been borrowed from Asian moneylenders in Darwin to help pay for her debt in Thailand. 13. In late October 1993 the plaintiff says that the defendant had told him that since meeting him she had not felt like being with other men and as a result had not worked for a number of days. The defendant began speaking about the possibility of them both going to Thailand together. She indicated to the plaintiff that if he asked her to marry him, she would accept. The plaintiff says that on Friday 29 October she asked him how he felt about her and that she had been thinking about asking him to help in the payment of her debts but didn't know how he would react. The plaintiff said that he was not rich but would try and help her if he could. She said to him that the next instalment was due in the next couple of days in the sum of $6500.00 and she asked for that amount in cash. She also commented that it would be good if she could obtain help with the repayment of her Darwin debts which she stated amounted to approximately $20,000.00 and that she had to make payments of $1800.00 a week. She offered to sign papers relating to repaying the instalment of $6500.00, or alternatively she said she could repay it in terms of services rendered. The plaintiff agreed to the latter and withdrew that amount from his Commonwealth Savings Bank account. When he saw her next, on 1 November 1993, he gave her $6,500.00 in cash. On that occasion the defendant suggested that they become girlfriend and boyfriend, with a possibility of a longer term relationship. 14. The plaintiff says that he felt that the relationship was more in the nature of a personal one, that he cared for her, was attracted to her and had a desire to help her out with her problems. He began thinking about the size of her debts and the way in which they could be repaid and on 2 November he telephoned the defendant and discussed the possibility of helping her with her debt to the Darwin moneylenders. At this stage he did not know the amount of her Thailand debt. He asked her what the amount of that debt was, but the defendant replied that it was her problem and he was not to worry about it. He claims that the defendant said that if the plaintiff helped with the repayment of the Darwin debt she would tell him all about herself and move in with him at some time in the future. 15. On the evening of 3 November 1993 the plaintiff told the defendant that he was about to arrange a loan from his bank for renovations to his house and would see what he could do to help concerning the Darwin debt of $20,000.00. 16. During discussions in this period the plaintiff says that the defendant had asked him about the possibility of his raising $80,000.00 to pay for her debts in Darwin and to go towards the debt in Thailand. Later in the week, the plaintiff says that he discovered that she had actually meant $100,000.00 in total. The plaintiff said that he told the defendant that his bank had agreed to lend him $80,000.00. The defendant said that this amount would enable her to reduce the Thailand debt to such an extent that she would be able to return to Thailand to visit her parents and talk to her cousin, to whom she owed the money. It would also enable her to arrange for her monthly repayments of the debt to be lowered. The plaintiff said that he would see what he could do. 17. On the evening of 5 November 1993 the plaintiff alleges that the defendant rang her father whilst at the plaintiff's home. She asked the plaintiff to speak to her father on the telephone so that her father would believe that she did have a boyfriend who was helping her. The plaintiff did speak briefly to the person on the other end of the telephone, merely to say hello, as he does not speak Thai. 18. On 10 November 1993 the plaintiff telephoned the defendant and asked her whether she had any receipts or documentation to substantiate the details of the money owing in Thailand. The defendant told him that she had nothing like that in Darwin, that the loan documents were with her father in Thailand, but she had some photos of her mother and other members of her family. Later that evening she came over to the plaintiff's home and showed him some photographs of her mother and the rest of her family, and her Australian passport. It was only then that the plaintiff discovered her real name. The photo of her mother which the plaintiff was shown was of a very pale, ill, elderly looking lady with part of one of her legs having been amputated. 19. The plaintiff says from early November the defendant often spoke about them going to Thailand together, meeting her family, becoming engaged, and of her preference for a traditional Thai wedding. She spoke of getting married in the future and how her father would wish to show him around and introduce him to people he knew. 20. After seeing the photographs the plaintiff claims that he decided to lend her the whole of the $80,000.00 and that he later arranged an additional $15,000.00 to undertake the planned renovations to his home. The plaintiff says that he told the defendant that he would make this money available to her to help her with her debts. The defendant said to him that she wanted the money in cash because she had problems transferring money from the Commonwealth Bank to Thailand and that she wanted it to go through Westpac. 21. On the evening of 8 November the defendant called at the plaintiff's home and told him that she did not have enough money for food and rent. The plaintiff says that he gave her $200.00 cash from his wallet and asked if that was enough; the defendant said that she needed another $50.00, which he then gave her. The plaintiff says that he gave her $200.00 on 15 November and another $200.00 on 27 November, both for food and rent. 22. The plaintiff alleges that during this period the defendant raised the possibility of his selling his home and using the funds from this to help reduce the debt in Thailand; that she said that they would move into a flat together and when the debts were paid off, later buy a house; and that she insisted that all monies provided would be returned as the debts were hers. 23. On 11 November the plaintiff arranged to vary the conditions of his loan, to borrow $60,000.00 for the purposes of repaying the defendant's debt and on the following day he telegraphically transferred $60,000.00 to the defendant's father's account in Thailand. He claims that he also withdrew $1800.00 in cash for the next weekly repayment of the defendant's loan with the Darwin moneylender. Later that day he alleges that the defendant visited him at his home and that he gave to her the receipt from the bank relating to the telegraphic transfer and $1800.00 in cash for the weekly payment of the Darwin debt. He says that the defendant asked if she could ring her father to let him know that the funds had been sent; that she made the telephone call and asked the plaintiff to speak to her father; and that the plaintiff did so, and was thanked for sending the money. 24. On Monday 15 November the plaintiff says that he raised a bank cheque for $20,000.00, payable to the Darwin moneylender and on that night gave the cheque to the defendant, when there was again discussion about becoming engaged and going to Thailand and moving in together. 25. About a week after providing the $80,000.00 the plaintiff says that the defendant arrived at the defendant's home with a suitcase containing clothes; that she said that she would come and stay at his home after she had finished for the night; and that she did not come back to his home after that. 26. On 18 November 1993 the plaintiff says the defendant rang him to say that she had received a phone call from Thailand to say that her mother was seriously ill and had been hospitalised; that it was uncertain whether a further operation would be needed; that she thought she may need to fly to Thailand due to the nature of the sudden illness; that she told the plaintiff that she had another debt in Darwin, of which she had not previously informed him and which was being repaid at the rate of $450.00 a week. The following morning he claims that the defendant telephoned him again and asked him what he was going to do about the possibility of flying to Thailand to see her mother and to help her with the other debt in Darwin; and that he replied that they would have to get together and talk about it. 27. On the evening of 22 November the plaintiff claims that he and the defendant met again; that the defendant asked whether the $15,000.00 for the planned renovations to the house could be used to help with the hospital costs and the last debt; that he said that that money was required to be spent on renovations and the only way he could raise any more money was to cash in two insurance policies; that the defendant said words to the effect that she wanted both of them to go to Thailand together; and that the plaintiff said that he would not be able to go as there was only enough money for one person. The plaintiff alleges that it was decided to pay out the further debt that was owed in Darwin and to send any remaining money to Thailand to help with her mother's hospital bills. He claims that the defendant also said that because she had not been working she had missed the previous payment of $450.00 of the Darwin debt and the repayments had therefore increased to $500.00; that she asked if he could help her with meeting the next payment; and that he gave her $500.00 in cash that same evening. 28. During the week of 22 November 1993 the plaintiff claims that he surrendered his two insurance policies; that the funds were credited to his bank account; that the proceeds, namely $12,000.00 were handed over in cash to the defendant on the evening of 2 December; that on that evening the defendant suggested other ways in which he might raise money to send to Thailand towards the defendant's mother's hospitalisation; that she suggested taking a cash advance against his credit cards or asking his friends to lend him money; and that the defendant claimed that she was sick and not able to work. 29. On 3 December the plaintiff alleges that the defendant telephoned the plaintiff and told him that after paying the remaining debt in Darwin and fixing up some of her own bills, she had sent $1000.00 to Thailand to go towards the costs of her mother's hospitalisation. 30. On 11 December the plaintiff alleges that the defendant told him that she was intending to contact a girlfriend who was working in Tasmania, about going down there to work for a month or two and would come and see him to talk to him about it. The following day the plaintiff claims that he telephoned the defendant who again suggested he obtain cash advances against his credit cards or ask his friends to lend him money; but that the plaintiff said that he could not help in that way. It was at this time that the plaintiff began to become suspicious of the defendant and he caused some enquiries to be made. He says that he has obtained information from a person, "A", who has asked not to be identified because he is fearful of recrimination if it is found out that he has passed on this information. "A" informed him that he had known the defendant for some years, the defendant is married with three children and lives with her husband at 33 Robinson Road, Rapid Creek; that her husband normally drives her to her appointments; that the defendant has been living in Darwin for a number of years and has obtained large amounts of money from men on numerous occasions in amounts normally varying from between $20,000.00 and $100,000.00; that her activities were well known within the Thai community and that her normal mode of operation was to talk about her mother and the debt incurred in relation to operations to save her life and the need to borrow money from moneylenders either in Darwin or Thailand; that she usually offers to form a relationship with the person and to get engaged with a view to later marriage; that when the money runs out she tells the man involved that she no longer wants to have anything to do with him and that she has in the past channelled money obtained from men through moneylenders in Darwin. 31. As a result of that information the plaintiff caused his solicitors to obtain real property searches. Those searches revealed that the defendant is the registered proprietor of a home at 33 Robinson Road, Millner, purchased in 1988. 32. In paragraph 3 of the statement of claim the plaintiff alleges the defendant had made a number of representations to him. The defendant, in her defence, has admitted the following representations were made:

1. that the defendant's mother had been and was seriously ill;
2. that she had made substantial payments towards the cost of medical treatment for her mother;
3. that she would be required in the future to make substantial payments towards the cost of medical treatment for her mother;
4. that she did not have any means to pay for the cost of her mother's medical treatment in the future;
5. that she had borrowed substantial sums of money, totalling in excess of $80,000.00 from a person in Thailand to assist her in paying the costs of her mother's medical treatment and was under an obligation to repay the debts by regular instalments in the sum of $6500.00;
6. that she had borrowed over $20,000.00 from a moneylender in Darwin, Sirirat Thammathorn, to assist her in paying the costs of her mother's medical treatment and was under an obligation to repay these debts by regular instalments in the sum of $1800.00;
7. she did not have any means to repay the abovementioned loans or to pay the instalments due thereon.
8. Some other allegations were also made but these were denied.
9. By her defence the defendant has admitted that the plaintiff advanced the sum of $60,000.00 by way of telegraphic transfer to the plaintiff's father in Thailand on 12 November 1993 and that the sum of $20,000.00 was paid to Thammathorn on 15 November 1993, but states that these sums were by way of gift from the plaintiff to the defendant. The balance of the cash amounts which the plaintiff claims to have lent the defendant are denied as ever having occurred at all.
10. In the statement of claim the plaintiff alleges that the representations which I have referred to above were to the knowledge of the defendant false, misleading and deceptive and that the advances made were induced by the defendant's fraudulent conduct. These allegations are also denied.
11. By a separate summons addressed to the Darwin moneylender Sirirat Thammathorn (hereinafter referred to as the third party), the third party was required to disclose all documents or records in her possession custody or control that evidenced the loan of money by the third party to the defendant and the record of repayment of those loans made by the payment of the sum of $1800.00 on 12 November and the sum of $20,000.00 on 15 November. In answer to that summons the third party filed an affidavit of discovery in which she swore that the only document in her power possession and control was a copy of an ANZ Access Savings Account bank statement from 4 November 1993 to 3 December 1993. A copy of that bank statement has been tendered in these proceedings as Exhibit P1. That statement shows that as at 4 November 1993 there was a credit balance of $10,939.52 in the account. On 16 November there was recorded a deposit of $20,000.00 and on the same day a withdrawal of the same amount by means of cheque number 352742. In other words, the third party produced no documents evidencing the original loan, i.e. no loan agreement, no signed receipt for any money advanced, no bank records indicating even that $20,000.00 or any other such sum had ever been withdrawn from her account. At the time of the hearing before me there was no information as to what had happened to the $20,000.00 withdrawn on 16 November.