Find a Barrister

Find an Arbitrator

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
people

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

Contact

Contact with chambers should be made through the Practice Management Team. They are happy to discuss client requirements and provide further information on such matters as the expertise and experience of individual members, fees, working practices and languages spoken. We have members able to work in French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Greek and Chinese (Mandarin).

Outside working hours, a member of our team is always available to be contacted on matters of an urgent nature. Contact should be made using the Chambers main number or email.

To contact our Singapore office, please contact our BD Director, Asia, Rachel Foxton. Out of office hours calls will automatically be diverted to our clerking team in London.

London

Twenty Essex Street
London
WC2R 3AL

enquiries@twentyessex.com
t: +44 20 7842 1200
DX 0009 Lond/Chan Lane

Singapore

28 Maxwell Road
#02-03
Maxwell Chambers Suites
Singapore 069120

singapore@twentyessex.com
t: +65 62257230

07/05/2013

E, F & G v M [2013] EWHC 895 (Comm)

This is an archived article, and some links may not work. Contact us if you have any questions.

In this judgment, Hamblen J ruled on important points relating to the scope of a worldwide freezing order (“WFO”) granted in support of arbitration proceedings and what is needed to purge a party’s contempt.


The respondent (M) had not provided an affidavit of assets at the required time and had been held to be in contempt of court. The affidavit was then provided but the claimant (F) asserted that M had not yet purged its contempt because supporting evidence was required and an explanation of the earlier failure should have been provided. Hamblen J rejected these points holding that it was sufficient that the affidavit had now been served together with an apology which was neither conditional or limited.


Hamblen J similarly rejected F’s argument that the WFO on the standard Commercial Court wording would freeze assets held by companies who had the same director or owner as M on the basis that M had, via its director, indirect control of the third party assets. Hamblen J held that this would give extraordinarily wide ranging effect to the WFO and would be tantamount to piercing the corporate veil without grounds for doing so. The conclusion would also be contrary to the principles applying to the exercise of the “Chabra jurisdiction” set out recently in The Mahakam [2012] 2 All ER (Comm) 513.


Hamblen J declined to discharge the WFO on the grounds that F had arrested a ship and F had failed over a period of a year to serve arbitration claim submissions detailing its claim for US$16 million (the frozen sum). Hamblen J concluded that undertaking not to obtain orders overseas “of a similar nature” to the WFO did not preclude the associated ship arrest obtained by F against M. Although the claim submissions should have been provided more speedily, Hamblen J did not consider this alone to be sufficient reason to discharge the WFO.


Josephine Davies for the defendant (instructed by Cooke, Young and Keidan)

Share