UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

IN RE APPLICATION OF DAILANE

INVESTMENTS LIMITED AND 

MICHAEL MAILLIS FOR JUDICIAL Case No.

ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO 

28 U.S.C. § 1782

DECLARATION OF RICHARD LEDAIN SANTIAGO IN SUPPORT OF 

APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1782

I, Richard Ledain Santiago, declare pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 as follows:

1. I am a licensed attorney (avocat à la Cour) in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, 

registered on List I of the Luxembourg Bar, and a partner in Addleshaw Goddard LLP’s 

Luxembourg office. I represent Mr. Michael Maillis and Dailane Investments Limited 

(“Dailane”) in connection with claims arising out of breaches of fiduciary duty by H.I.G. 

Luxembourg Holdings 47 S.à r.l. (“HIG47”), Wolfgang Biedermann, Christian Kraul-von 

Renner and Maillis International S.A. (“Maillis Group”). 

2. My clients intend to file a lawsuit in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg against HIG47 for 

breach of the Amended and Restated Fiduciary Agreement, originally dated April 11, 

2016, before the Commercial Chambers of the Tribunal d'Arrondissement of 

Luxembourg. They will also pursue claims for breach of fiduciary duty against Mssrs. 

Wolfgang Biedermann and Christian Kraul-von Renner, each of whom is on the Board of 

Maillis Group while also holding executive positions in HIG Europe, in the same court. 

Dailane intends to file a claim against Maillis International S.A. itself for “loss of 

chance,” a cause of action under Luxembourg law that allows a third party to file suit for 

Case 1:22-mc-23619-RKA Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 1 of 3
2

financial prejudice arising from a director’s breach of duty to a corporation and its 

shareholders.

3. The Amended and Restated Fiduciary Agreement requires any disputes between the 

parties to that agreement—there, Dailane Ltd. and HIG47—to adjudicate their disputes in 

the courts of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The lawsuit contemplated by Mr. Maillis 

and Dailane Investments Limited will therefore be filed in the Grand Duchy of 

Luxembourg in the Commercial Chambers of the Tribunal d'Arrondissement of 

Luxembourg.

4. Luxembourg law allows for the imposition of civil liability for breach of contract, and 

this suit would comprise a valid cause of action. 

5. Luxembourg law allows for the imposition of civil liability on directors by third parties 

for damages arising out of a director’s infringement of the Companies Act (Article 441-9) 

or for commission of torts as specified in Articles 1382 or 1383 of the Luxembourg Civil 

Code. 

6. Luxembourgian law permits extraterritorial fact-finding prior to (or during) a lawsuit and 

Luxembourg’s courts regularly admit evidence and testimony from other jurisdictions—

including the type sought in this action. Luxembourg’s Code of Civil Procedure, at 

Article 58, imposes the burden of proof on the party initiating the legal action to produce 

evidence in support of their claims and defenses in commercial disputes such as this one. 

It is customary to present all evidence when filing the complaint, which is why the 

Petitioners are seeking discovery before filing. 

7. A party may obtain and introduce business records, including emails pertaining to 

confidential corporate matters. This information is not protected by legal privilege. 

Case 1:22-mc-23619-RKA Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 2 of 3
3

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true 

and correct.

Executed this ____ day of November 2022.

____________________________________

Richard Ledain Santiago

2nd

Case 1:22-mc-23619-RKA Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/04/2022 Page 3 of 3