Freezing Injunctions - Frenkel V Lyampert

Judge discharges freezing injunction where application for an injunction in another jurisdiction was made on notice and changes to the standard form freezing injunction were not brought to attention of the court

In this case, the judge discharged an earlier freezing injunction ordered by Kerr J on the ground of material non-disclosure. Those non-disclosures included the following issues:

1. The freezing injunction was obtained in support of the applicant's claim to enforce a judgment obtained against the respondent in California. The applicant had failed to bring to the court's attention the fact that it had applied inter partes for an injunction in California. That application had been served on the respondent over three weeks before. The judge said that this was highly material because "it obviously goes to the issue as to whether, objectively, there was a real risk that [the respondent] would dissipate his assets". In fact, the respondent had not done anything