Freezing Orders - Gulf Air v One Inflight

Case Alert - [2018] EWHC 1019 (Comm)

One of the arguments raised by the defendants in this case was that, in order to establish a risk of dissipation in a freezing order application, it was not sufficient for the applicant to rely on (at this stage, unproven) allegations of fraud. That argument was rejected by the judge, who noted that prior caselaw has established that it can be appropriate to take into account the underlying allegations made against the defendant. Here, there had been allegations that the defendants had redirected "not inconsiderable amounts of money" belonging to the applicant as part of a conspiracy to defraud the applicant. The defendants had also shown themselves ready and able to use corporate structures in a dishonest way in the past. Furthermore, it could not be argued that conduct some while ago, or "isolated acts" of dishonesty could not be relevant to the issue of whether there was a risk of dissipation: "bearing in mind (again) the nature of the allegations which have been levelled against...