UL v BK
The ex parte freezing order was fatally flawed due to breach of duty of candour, lack of evidence of unjustified dealing or risk of dissipation, omission of standard safeguards, absence of exceptional urgency, and failure to offer undertakings in damages. The order was discharged and not re-granted.
- Parties
- Applicant: UL; Respondent: BK
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 24 June 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Divorce/ancillary Relief / Application for Continuation of Ex Parte Freezing Order
- Outcome
- Freezing order discharged; injunction not re-granted.
- Legal Topics
- Freezing Injunctions, Ex Parte Applications, Duty of Candour, Breach of Confidence, Misuse of Private Information
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
UL
Applicant
BK
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Divorce/ancillary Relief / Application for Continuation of Ex Parte Freezing Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the ex parte freezing order should be continued or discharged
- 2 Whether the applicant breached the duty of candour
- 3 Whether sufficient evidence of risk of dissipation was provided
Ratio Decidendi
The ex parte freezing order was fatally flawed due to breach of duty of candour, lack of evidence of unjustified dealing or risk of dissipation, omission of standard safeguards, absence of exceptional urgency, and failure to offer undertakings in damages. The order was discharged and not re-granted.
Court Disposition
Freezing order discharged; injunction not re-granted.
Orders
- Husband's undertaking not to dispose of Marbella property accepted.
- No freezing/preservation order imposed over Marbella property due to wife's misconduct.
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