We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
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.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.