The English Commercial Court recently denied an applicant's attempt to set aside a worldwide freezing order on the basis that there was a risk that the individual would try to hide his wealth if the order was discharged.

Freezing orders, one of the two "nuclear weapons" of the law , are important and potentially critical tools available to litigants whose adversaries' intention to honour adverse judgments are doubtful.

The case of FM Capital Partners v Marino provides a useful reminder of the rationale for, and material benefits of, worldwide freezing orders in the context of high value litigation, and provides useful guidance to the approach the courts will adopt when determining the risk of dissipation of assets for the purpose of assessing whether the order should be continued.

Downloads –