This chapter critically analyses the origins of the modern freezing injunction. The analysis is not limited to the landmark cases in 1975, Karageorgis and Mareva, covered in detail in this chapter. It argues that an important part of the historical foundations of freezing injunctions is the original exception to the general rule: the proprietary freezing injunction. Understanding the nature of the proprietary freezing injunction is crucial in order to assess the legitimacy of extending the scope of the exception to non-proprietary claims in 1975. The chapter recognises that there is now an important new category of freezing injunction, the so-called Chabra injunction against third parties. A detailed analysis of the scope of Chabra injunctions reveals serious concerns about a level playing field in litigation.

This chapter discusses the purpose of freezing injunctions and their potential for exploitation by unscrupulous claimants for tactical and strategtic aims. Emphasis is placed on the use of freezing injunction for unmeritorious purposes due to the potential of the injunction to ruin a thriving business. An overview of the key requirements for obtaining freezing injunctions is provided with a view to identifying potential problems with each requirement in domestic and international cases. A number of hypothetical scenarios is used to illustrate concerns about the current scope of freezing injunctions. It is demonstrated that these concerns are not limited to the protection of defendants but also the interests of foreign states.

rules in English and EU law on freezing orders

rules in English and EU law on freezing orders