LTE Scientific Ltd. v Thomas & Anor
The facts did not meet the high threshold of urgency required for a freezing order without notice. The applicant had already put the respondents on notice and had time to apply on notice. There was no evidence of imminent dissipation within the short period required to bring an on-notice application.
- Parties
- Applicant: LTE Scientific Ltd; Respondent: Mr Thomas; Respondent: Mrs Thomas
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 27 July 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Application for Permission to Appeal (interlocutory)
- Outcome
- application refused
- Legal Topics
- Freezing Orders, Ex Parte Applications, Urgency Requirement, Restrictive Covenants, Contempt of Court
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
LTE Scientific Ltd
Applicant
Mr Thomas
Respondent
Mrs Thomas
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Permission to Appeal (interlocutory)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the urgency justified granting a freezing order without notice
- 2 Whether the applicant demonstrated a real risk of dissipation of assets justifying ex parte relief
Ratio Decidendi
The facts did not meet the high threshold of urgency required for a freezing order without notice. The applicant had already put the respondents on notice and had time to apply on notice. There was no evidence of imminent dissipation within the short period required to bring an on-notice application.
Court Disposition
application refused
Orders
- Application for permission to appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment