Wrongly obtained freezing orders will not survive for long, say John Fordham and Richard Garcia
Hot on the heels of Exxon Mobil's failure to hang on to the $12bn worldwide freezing injunction ordered by the English court against PDVSA, the Venezuelan national oil company, an attempt at freezing the assets of the Republic of Bolivia and its telecommunications company, Entel, has recently been thrown out by the English court.
In both cases, the English court granted a freezing order, without notice to the defendants, in order to protect the position until an all parties hearing could be convened, and, in both cases, the freezing orders were then discharged forthwith. Far from auguring the end of English assistance to foreign proceedings, these cases show the willingness of the English court to play a leading role at the forefront of international dispute resolution, but only in circumstances where there is a legitimate basis on which to do so.
ETI v (1) Bolivia (2) Entel
On 7 May 2008, Euro Telecom International NV (ETI) applied to
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
