header-logo header-logo

03 March 2011 / Caroline Halliday , Graham Huntley
Issue: 7455 / Categories: Features , Profession , Marketing
printer mail-detail

Cold comfort

When a freezing order is not enough is it time to get the receivers in, ask Graham Huntley & Caroline Halliday

In a world where financial structures are becoming ever more sophisticated and complex, we are used to seeing the law adapt and evolve to address the new challenges that these present. However, we sometimes need to remind ourselves of how our existing arsenal of weapons can come to our aid in fighting new legal battles, and this can include appointing receivers in support of freezing orders.

The High Court’s power to appoint a receiver is covered by the Senior Courts Act 1981, s 37(1). The development of the Mareva regime pursuant to the same legislation in the mid-1970s paved the way for receivers to be appointed pre-judgment in support of freezing orders, either at the same time as the freezing order or subsequently. This is not to say that the floodgates opened: the remedy has always been seen as of a “drastic” nature, which should be employed only in exceptional circumstances. However,

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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
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 
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
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
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’
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’ 
back-to-top-scroll