On 23 June 1975 the Court of Appeal, after hearing from Bernard Rix (as he then was), continued an order in Mareva Compania Naviera SA v International Bulk Carriers SA (The Mareva) [1980] 1 All ER 213 preventing the defendant disposing of or removing assets (monies held in a bank account) from this jurisdiction pending the outcome of the claim against it. And thus the Mareva (freezing) injunction was born.
Designed to address the mischief of a defendant with no defence to a claim moving assets out of this jurisdiction to avoid, or at least delay, payment of a judgment, the freezing injunction is now 50 years old. It is beloved of asset recovery specialists, bemoaned by defendant lawyers and envied by lawyers practising in locations where the jurisdiction is not available. The purpose is to protect a claimant from circumstances in which a defendant deliberately makes himself judgment-proof; not to provide security for a claimant against the ordinary use of assets by a defendant,
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7806223b_1)
