Peter Gibson LJ emphasised that in freezing order applications, ‘it is important that there should be solid evidence adduced to the Court of the likelihood of dissipation.’ He went on to say that it was not enough merely to point to some dishonesty on the part of the respondent to justify the making of a freezing order: ‘I have to say that, if that has become the practice, then the practice should be reconsidered. It is appropriate in each case for the Court to scrutinise with care whether what is alleged to have been the dishonesty of the person against whom the order is sought in itself really justifies the inference that that person has assets which he is likely to dissipate unless restricted.’
Judges:
Peter Gibson LJ
Citations:
[2003] EWCA Civ 1272
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Thane Investments Ltd and Another v Tomlinson ChD 6-Dec-2002
The claimants had obtained an ex parte freezing order. The respondent complained that they had failed to provide full notes of the hearing as required.
Held: It was vital that those obtaining ex parte relief should comply with the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Franses v Al Assad and others ChD 26-Oct-2007
The claimant had obtained a freezing order over the proceeds of sale of a property held by solicitors. The claimant was liquidator of a company, and an allegation of wrongful trading had been made against the sole director and defendant. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.186544
