Going head to head

31 January 2014 / David Sandy

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?

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, 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

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?

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, 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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Gibson Dunn—London partner promotions

Firm grows international bench with expanded UK partner class

Shakespeare Martineau—six appointments

Firm makes major statement in the capital with strategic growth at The Shard

Myers & Co—Jess Latham

Residential conveyancing team expands with solicitor hire

NEWS

Read All

Stress at work for corporate counsel

One in five in-house lawyers suffer ‘high’ or ‘severe’ work-related stress, according to a report by global legal body, the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC)

Chancery Lane says no to LeO

The Legal Ombudsman’s (LeO’s) plea for a budget increase has been rejected by the Law Society and accepted only ‘with reluctance’ by conveyancers

Human rights concerns for patients, prisoners & immigration detainees

Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned

Licensing fast-track for conveyancing & probate professionals

Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals

Stress at work? Join the (employment tribunal claim) queue

Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace

Error message

Going head to head

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gibson Dunn—London partner promotions

Shakespeare Martineau—six appointments

Myers & Co—Jess Latham