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
Courts may act where there is a ‘real risk of dissipation’, often triggered by unusual transactions or poor disclosure. Crucially, orders can cover global assets and even those held by third parties, particularly where ‘sham’ arrangements are suspected.
James recounts a case where a business associate was drawn into proceedings, accused of dishonesty and deprived of sale proceeds until trial.
Even legitimate informal loans can attract scrutiny. The lesson is clear: document arrangements carefully and act quickly if proceedings arise. While protective in intent, freezing orders can be highly disruptive, leaving innocent parties caught in costly, complex litigation with little warning.
RELATED ARTICLES
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=6e6975ed_1)
