31 January 2014 / David Sandy

Issue: 7592 / Categories: Features , Commercial

Going head to head

Incompatible judgments on the same day have led to confusion over the scope of standard wording, says David Sandy

If a respondent subject to a freezing order in standard terms arranges for the disposal of assets of a company he owns and controls, is the respondent in breach of the freezing order?

In Group Seven Limited v Allied Investment Corporation Limited and Others [2013] EWHC 1509 (Ch) Hildyard J decided that such a respondent would not be in breach of the freezing order. In Lakatamia Shipping Company v Nobu Su and Others [2013] EWHC 1814 (Comm), Burton J decided that the respondent would be in breach of the freezing order. Both judgments were handed down on the same day, 6 June 2013.

Who is right? And if Hildyard J is right, what steps can be taken to ensure that a freezing order does extend to catch assets held by a company controlled and owned by the respondent?

It is perhaps surprising that this issue has not come up for decision before,

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

Going head to head

Issue: 7592 / Categories: Features , Commercial

Incompatible judgments on the same day have led to confusion over the scope of standard wording, says David Sandy

If a respondent subject to a freezing order in standard terms arranges for the disposal of assets of a company he owns and controls, is the respondent in breach of the freezing order?

Who is right? And if Hildyard J is right, what steps can be taken to ensure that a freezing order does extend to catch assets held by a company controlled and owned by the respondent?

It is perhaps surprising that this issue has not come up for

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

EIP strengthens Commercial practice with a new partner

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Ellisons welcomes Francesca Brown to Family team

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens Sheffield regulatory practice with new hires

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: A cautionary tale of bankruptcy and digital promises

A wide-ranging Civil Way column highlights developments from insolvency procedure to employment law, but one case stands out for its lessons on bankruptcy, family homes and digital communications

NLJ this week: Trade mark reality check for expanding brands

A sprawling Intellectual Property Office battle between House of Fraser and Frasers Property has delivered a masterclass in modern trade mark law

NLJ this week: Relocation battles demand more than good intentions

Courts in England and Wales and Singapore are increasingly confronting complex disputes over international child relocation as families become more globally mobile

NLJ this week: Domestic abuse reform faces its hardest test

The government’s long-awaited family law reform consultation could mark a turning point for domestic abuse victims navigating financial remedy proceedings, but significant challenges remain

NLJ this week: Open justice push brings experts into the spotlight

A new commercial court pilot giving the public access to documents used in hearings, including expert reports, is raising difficult questions about transparency and privacy

Error message

Going head to head

MOVERS & SHAKERS

EIP—Stuart Malcolm

Ellisons—Francesca Brown

Shakespeare Martineau—Marie Bourke