O’Regan v Iambic Productions: 1989

The court set out a series of elements to be taken into account when making a Mareva asset freezing order: ‘1. The nature of the assets and the ease with which they can be dissipated.
2. The nature and financial standing of the defendant business.
3. The length of time the defendant has been in business for.
4. Any express or implied statement of intent made by the defendant in respect of dissipating assets.
5. Whether the substantive claim relates to dishonesty.
6. Previous compliance with Court orders.’

Citations:

(1989) 139 NLG

Cited by:

AppliedShepherd Construction Ltd v Berners (BVI) Ltd and Another TCC 25-Mar-2010
The defendants sought a release from an asset freezing order, saying that there was no good reason to anticipate any dissipation of assets. An action between the parties had been settled on terms, but the defendant had not met payments. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.416018