Private International Law Aspects of Freezing Injunctions
The Commercial Court in London is frequently dealing with applications for a freezing injunction. The vast majority of academic literature and court decisions directly or indirectly adopt the view that freezing injunctions have stood the test of time and are so frequently granted in commercial litigation that there is no need for any serious concern about their scope, let alone the need to identify and question the legitimacy of the justifications for their existence. Contrary to the traditional view, this thesis has identified equipage equality as the primary function of freezing injunctions. This recognition that freezing injunctions seek to establish a level-playing field in litigation has led the author to conclude that the current scope of the relief is excessively claimant-friendly and involves illegitimate interference with the sovereignty of foreign states. Taking into account the tactical reasons for seeking a freezing injunction, the author challenges the current interpretation of the substantive preconditions for granting the relief. Their current interpretation does not strike a fair balance between the interests of the parties. The author argues that these concerns are exacerbated by the current international scope of freezing injunctions due to the insufficient regard for the principles of public international law. The encroachment on the jurisdiction of foreign states undermines equipage equality by enabling claimants to make multiple applications for interim relief in respect of the same assets. In the light of the above, the author has sought to make a range of proposals to restrict the scope of freezing injunctions with the aim of bringing the relief in line with equipage equality.
Private International Law, Conflict of Laws, Freezing Injunctions, Mareva Injunctions, Jurisdiction, Equitable remedies, Civil Procedure
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations