Gerald Metals SA v Timis and others [2016] EWHC 2327 (Ch), [2016] All ER (D) 31 (Oct)
The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant’s application for a freezing injunction in respect of a dispute concerning a substantial loan. Following that judgment, the Commercial Division of the High Court, in dismissing the claimant’s application for an urgent freezing injunction, under s 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996, held that it was only in cases where the powers of an arbitral tribunal were inadequate, or where the practical ability was lacking to exercise those powers, that the court might act under s 44 of the Act in respect of parties subject to an arbitration agreement.
