Abstract
Since its inception in 1975 the freezing injunction has developed quite significantly. Apart from its change of name (from Mareva injunction), there has been an expansion of its jurisdictional basis as well as the safeguards provided for defendants. This paper looks at that expansion and considers three issues relating to the injunction (the extent of the applicant’s duty to make full and frank disclosure of all material facts, contempt of court and the privilege against self-incrimination) before recommending a measure to enhance the injunction’s efficacy.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 28-36 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Business Law Review |
| Volume | 31 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2010 |