Caitrin & Ors (pseudonyms) (No 2), Re Freezing Injunction: Application to discharge or vary [2010] NIFam 4 (25 February 2010)

Caitrin & Ors (pseudonyms) (No 2), Re Freezing Injunction: Application to discharge or vary [2010] NIFam 4 (25 February 2010)

On present evidence, monies in disputed accounts provisionally belong to Fergus; evidence for third-party ownership and debt is lacking in particularity and not supported by documents; need for funeral and medical expenses not sufficiently established or verified; risk that children's support order would not be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] NIFam 4
Parties
Applicant: Marcail (pseudonym); Respondent: Fergus (pseudonym); Children: Caitrin, Dona, Elliot (pseudonyms)
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
25 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Application to Discharge or Vary Freezing Injunction / Post Interlocutory, Judgment on Application
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunction, Asset Ownership, Financial Provision for Children, Variation/discharge of Injunction
Family Law Civil Procedure Freezing Injunction Asset Ownership Financial Provision for Children Variation/discharge of Injunction

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marcail (pseudonym)

Applicant

Fergus (pseudonym)

Respondent

Caitrin, Dona, Elliot (pseudonyms)

Children

Procedural Posture

Application to Discharge or Vary Freezing Injunction / Post Interlocutory, Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether monies in bank accounts belong to third parties or Fergus
  2. 2 Whether Fergus owes a debt to his father
  3. 3 Whether freezing injunction should be varied/discharged for funeral and medical expenses

Ratio Decidendi

On present evidence, monies in disputed accounts provisionally belong to Fergus; evidence for third-party ownership and debt is lacking in particularity and not supported by documents; need for funeral and medical expenses not sufficiently established or verified; risk that children's support order would not be satisfied absent injunction; just and convenient to maintain freezing injunction.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • freezing injunction maintained
  • respondent may bring further evidence and reapply