Law360 Canada ( August 21, 2025, 4:18 PM EDT) -- Appeal by Su from chambers judge’s dismissal of his applications. The respondents commenced a civil action against Su and secured several ex parte orders to search for, seize, examine and preserve certain evidence and digital assets (Anton Piller order), and an injunction freezing Su’s assets (Mareva injunction). The chambers judge granted the application and issued the requested Mareva injunction. Su later applied to set aside both orders. The chambers judge dismissed his applications. Su claimed the judge erred in his application of the test for determining material non-disclosure at ex parte hearings and his exercise of discretion in determining that, even if non-disclosure were material, the orders should nonetheless be maintained. The principal issues on appeal were whether the chambers judge erred by finding there was no material non-disclosure at the ex parte hearings and whether there were grounds for interfering with the chambers judge’s decision to maintain the orders....