header-logo header-logo

Facing the facts

26 May 2011 / Claire Sanders
Issue: 7467 / Categories: Features , Divorce , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Claire Sanders examines the principles of freezing orders in matrimonial proceedings as highlighted by ND v KP

Decisions on whether to apply for a freezing order in matrimonial proceedings generally have to be taken quickly. The decision in ND v KP (Asset freezing) [2011] EWHC 457 (Fam), [2011] All ER (D) 24 (May) provides a useful summary of the principles to be applied in relation to such applications and is a cautionary reminder of the duty of candour owed in the case of applications made without notice.

Facts

The parties were married in 2003. In July 2009 the wife commenced divorce proceedings and subsequently made an application for ancillary relief. In December 2010 she made a without notice application to the High Court for a freezing order under the court’s inherent jurisdiction. She successfully obtained an order freezing monies or funds within three bank accounts in Switzerland.

Her application was based on her assertion that the husband was in a position to deplete the assets and that there was a history of the husband

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll