header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 July 2025 / Rebecca Sabben-Clare KC
Issue: 8124 / Categories: Features , Profession , In Court , Freezing orders
printer mail-detail

Freezing injunctions at 50 (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
225402
After half a century, the freezing injunction is growing bolder & bolder, writes Rebecca Sabben-Clare KC
  • Since 1975, freezing injunctions have expanded in scope and complexity. Recent case law has debated what assets are caught and whether the ‘good arguable case’ test aligns with the ‘serious issue to be tried’ standard.
  • Practical challenges persist, including the high cost of applications and the burden of rapid disclosure on defendants.

As Mary Young wrote recently in this journal, Mareva injunctions (freezing orders) were born on 23 June 1975, when the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Mareva Cia Naviera SA v International Bulkcarriers SA The Mareva [1980] 1 All ER 213 (see ‘50 years & counting’, NLJ, 13 June 2025, p9).

Fifty years later, senior judges and lawyers met on 23 June 2025 for a seminar to mark the 50th anniversary. Lord Denning MR opened his judgment in The Mareva by saying that the case raised a ‘very important point of practice’, but

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll