Phoenix Group Foundation v Cochrane & Anor

Phoenix Group Foundation v Cochrane & Anor

There is a good arguable case that the £2 million was not validly transferred to Stewarts Law and may be amenable to execution of a judgment against Dr Cochrane, satisfying the Chabra jurisdiction. The balance of convenience favours continuation of the freezing order, as Stewarts Law faces minimal prejudice and Phoenix risks substantial prejudice if the order is discharged.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Phoenix Group Foundation; Defendant/respondent: Gail Alison Cochrane; Defendant/respondent: Stewarts Law LLP; Additional Applicant: Harbour Fund II LP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Hearing on Continuation/discharge of Freezing Order
Outcome
Freezing order continued until further order
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Chabra Jurisdiction, Asset Dissipation, Solicitors Accounts Rules
Civil Procedure Injunctions Commercial Law Freezing Orders Chabra Jurisdiction Asset Dissipation Solicitors Accounts Rules

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phoenix Group Foundation

Claimant/applicant

Gail Alison Cochrane

Defendant/respondent

Stewarts Law LLP

Defendant/respondent

Harbour Fund II LP

Additional Applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Hearing on Continuation/discharge of Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freezing order over £2 million in Stewarts Law's client account should be continued or discharged
  2. 2 Whether Phoenix has a legal basis for a freezing order against assets held by a third party (Stewarts Law)
  3. 3 Application of the Chabra jurisdiction to freeze assets held by a non-cause of action defendant

Ratio Decidendi

There is a good arguable case that the £2 million was not validly transferred to Stewarts Law and may be amenable to execution of a judgment against Dr Cochrane, satisfying the Chabra jurisdiction. The balance of convenience favours continuation of the freezing order, as Stewarts Law faces minimal prejudice and Phoenix risks substantial prejudice if the order is discharged.

Court Disposition

Freezing order continued until further order

Orders

  • £2 million to remain frozen in Stewarts Law's general client account
  • Sum to be paid to Enforcement Receivers to hold to the order of the Court pending determination of rival claims