B1 v B2 (No. 3) [2018] NSWDC 108

B1 v B2 (No. 3) [2018] NSWDC 108

Because a good arguable case exists for the defamation claim and there is an established danger a future judgment would be unsatisfied, interim freezing orders are warranted to restrain the defendant from dealing with assets pending further hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interim Application for Freezing Orders
Outcome
Application for interim freezing orders granted
Legal Topics
['freezing Orders' 'defamation' 'interim Relief']
['civil Procedure'] ['freezing Orders' 'defamation' 'interim Relief']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interim Application for Freezing Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a good arguable case exists for freezing orders in defamation proceedings against the defendant's main asset" 'Whether there is a real danger any prospective judgment will be wholly or partly unsatisfied if asset is sold']

Ratio Decidendi

Because a good arguable case exists for the defamation claim and there is an established danger a future judgment would be unsatisfied, interim freezing orders are warranted to restrain the defendant from dealing with assets pending further hearing.

Court Disposition

Application for interim freezing orders granted

Orders

  • ['Court grants leave to file the motion' 'Motion returnable instanter' "Service time for motion/affidavits abridged; effective service by email to defendant's solicitor by 5pm on 26 April 2018" 'Motion listed for hearing at 9am, Thursday 3 May 2018' 'Orders (6)-(20) in effect up to and including 3 May 2018'...