JSC BTA Bank v Kythreotis and others [2010] EWCA Civ 1436; [2010] WLR (D) 326
“The words ‘his assets’ in the standard form of freezing order in the Commercial Court Guide included assets which the respondent to the order held as a trustee or nominee for a third party.”
WLR Daily, 14th December 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Act 2010 published
Source: www.opsi.gov.uk
“Emergency legislation has been rushed through the House of Commons that will allow the assets of suspected terrorists to be frozen.”
BBC News, 9th February 2010
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
In re Guardian News and Media Ltd and others [2010] UKSC 1; [2010] WLR (D) 13
“Where individuals challenged freezing orders made against them under the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2006 and the Al-Qaida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) Order 2006 the general public interest in publishing a full report of the proceedings in which they were named justified curtailing their right to respect for their private and family lives.”
WLR Daily, 27th February 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Ahmed and others v HM Treasury (JUSTICE intervening); al-Ghabra v Same; R (Youssef) v Same
“In introducing a test of reasonable suspicion that a person was involved in terrorism as the basis for making an asset-freezing order against him under the Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2006 the Treasury exceeded its powers under the enabling provisions of s 1 of the United Nations Act 1946.”
WLR Daily, 27th January 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The new UK Supreme Court is to hear its first case as five men suspected of financing terrorism challenge the freezing of their assets.”
BBC News, 5th October 2009
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“An Iranian millionaire and business associate of David Mills, the estranged husband of Tessa Jowell, has had his assets frozen by the High Court as part of a claim that he and his company received £6.2m in unauthorised fees and payments from a Welsh steel mill which collapsed with the loss of more than 300 jobs.”
The Independent, 7th July 2007
Source: www.independent.co.uk
United States Securities and Exchange Commission v Manterfield
Court of Appeal
“A regulatory body in the United States seeking to enforce disgorgement of proceeds of alleged fraud could be granted a freezing order over assets in the United Kingdom.”
The Times, 18th March 2009
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“The Court of Appeal has ruled the government should be allowed to freeze the assets of suspected terrorists.”
BBC News, 30th October 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“International arbitration proceedings were not ‘proceedings’ for the purpose of s 25 of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 to enable the English court to grant interim relief to preserve the outcome of the arbitration proceedings. Where injunctive relief was sought in the English court, the claimant should deal both with state immunity from the adjudicative jurisdiction of the court and with state immunity from enforcement. The court should consider and decide the question of state immunity at as early a stage on the proceedings as practicable.”
WLR Daily, 29th July 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The assets of the fake canoe death couple, John and Anne Darwin, have been frozen in a first step towards retrieving the £250,000 they conned out of insurance companies, it emerged yesterday.”
The Guardian, 25th July 2008
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“An illegal landbanking scheme which sold plots of land to investors with the promise of big profits has had its assets frozen following action by the City watchdog.”
The Guardian, 4th June 2008
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury
Queen’s Bench Division
“Orders in Council, made purportedly to give effect to United Nations resolutions freezing the assets of terrorist organisations and their adherents, were to be quashed since, among other faults, they had been improperly made outside the parliamentary process and were bad as creating criminal law of insufficient certainty.”
The Times, 5th May 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“Anti-terrorism legislation was condemned as poorly thought-out by a senior High Court judge yesterday as he declared that the Treasury’s powers to freeze suspects’ bank accounts were unlawful.”
The Times, 25th April 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“Rules imposed under UN laws to enable the freezing of terror suspects’ assets are not lawful because they ‘bypassed’ Parliament, the High Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 24th April 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Lichter & Schwarz (a Partnership) v Rubin
Chancery Division
“When applying for an interim order directing a party to provide information about relevant property or assets which were, or could be the subject of an application for a freezing injunction, it was necessary to show only that there was a reasonable possibility, based on credible evidence, that a freezing injunction would be applied for.”
The Times, 18th April 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21days from the date of publication.
Lichter & Schwarz (a partnership) v Rubin [2008] EWHC 450 (Ch D); [2008] WLR (D) 93
“On an interim application for the disclosure of ‘information about relevant property or assets which are or may be the subject of an application for a freezing injunction’ pursuant to CPR r 25.1(1)(g), it was only necessary to show that a freezing order could be applied for and whether or not that application would be successful was not a matter on which the court could form a view at that stage; it need only be satisfied that there were credible grounds for making an application if so advised.”
WLR Daily, 20th March 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
© Inner Temple Library 2024