“Anti-terrorism legislation was condemned as poorly thought-out by a senior High Court judge yesterday as he declared that the Treasury’s powers to freeze suspects’ bank accounts were unlawful.”
The Times, 25th April 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
“Rules imposed under UN laws to enable the freezing of terror suspects’ assets are not lawful because they ‘bypassed’ Parliament, the High Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 24th April 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Lichter & Schwarz (a Partnership) v Rubin
Chancery Division
“When applying for an interim order directing a party to provide information about relevant property or assets which were, or could be the subject of an application for a freezing injunction, it was necessary to show only that there was a reasonable possibility, based on credible evidence, that a freezing injunction would be applied for.”
The Times, 18th April 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21days from the date of publication.
Lichter & Schwarz (a partnership) v Rubin [2008] EWHC 450 (Ch D); [2008] WLR (D) 93
“On an interim application for the disclosure of ‘information about relevant property or assets which are or may be the subject of an application for a freezing injunction’ pursuant to CPR r 25.1(1)(g), it was only necessary to show that a freezing order could be applied for and whether or not that application would be successful was not a matter on which the court could form a view at that stage; it need only be satisfied that there were credible grounds for making an application if so advised.”
WLR Daily, 20th March 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
© Inner Temple Library 2025