||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 39 (Sep)
||Queen's Bench Division (Commercial Court)
Christopher Clarke J
||Catherine Newman QC and Gregory Banner (instructed by Kerman & Co LLP) for the applicant.
||David Oliver QC, Mark Hoyle and Tim Hammond (instructed by Healys) for the respondent.
||11 September 2006
Practice - Pre-trial or post-judgment relief - Freezing order - Applicant having permission to enforce arbitral costs award - Respondent bring proceedings challenging costs award - Applicant obtaining freezing order against respondent - Whether appropriate to continue freezing order.
In the circumstances of the case, the applicant had not satisfied the relatively high burden of establishing that the respondent would dissipate its assets, and therefore it would not be appropriate to continue a freezing order obtained by the applicant against the respondent.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary