RISK OF EXTRADITION TAKES SECOND PLACE TO NEED TO GIVE PRACTICAL EFFECT TO A FREEZING ORDER

Gowling WLG, in the May 2018 edition of its Finance Litigation newsletter, reported on a case where the UK Court of Appeal has found that a debtor’s fears of extradition did not obviate the need for him to be cross-examined in person as to his assets under a worldwide freezing injunction.  In the case, the bank involved had made out a strong case against the respondent that he had been involved in a massive international fraud and was concealing evidence about relevant assets. The public interest in the court giving maximum practical effect to the freezing order it had granted was strong.

https://gowlingwlg.com/en/insights-resources/articles/2018/finance-litigation-cases-and-issues-may-2018

 

Author: raytodd2017

Chartered Legal Executive and former senior manager with Isle of Man Customs and Excise, where I was (amongst other things) Sanctions Officer (for UN/EU sanctions), Export Licensing Officer and Manager of the Legal-Library & Collectorate Support Section

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s