header-logo header-logo

03 March 2011 / Caroline Halliday , Graham Huntley
Issue: 7455 / Categories: Features , Profession , Marketing
printer mail-detail

Cold comfort

When a freezing order is not enough is it time to get the receivers in, ask Graham Huntley & Caroline Halliday

In a world where financial structures are becoming ever more sophisticated and complex, we are used to seeing the law adapt and evolve to address the new challenges that these present. However, we sometimes need to remind ourselves of how our existing arsenal of weapons can come to our aid in fighting new legal battles, and this can include appointing receivers in support of freezing orders.

The High Court’s power to appoint a receiver is covered by the Senior Courts Act 1981, s 37(1). The development of the Mareva regime pursuant to the same legislation in the mid-1970s paved the way for receivers to be appointed pre-judgment in support of freezing orders, either at the same time as the freezing order or subsequently. This is not to say that the floodgates opened: the remedy has always been seen as of a “drastic” nature, which should be employed only in exceptional circumstances. However, the Court of Appeal’s decision in JSC BTA Bank v

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll