Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

INJUNCTIONS: Let me know before you go go

17 February 2017  

David Sawtell assesses the utility of notification injunctions

In Holyoake v Candy [2016] Nugee J gave jurisprudential legitimacy to the use of a notification injunction to help prevent a respondent from dissipating assets. By this type of order, a party is required to give notice when certain assets are disposed of. Depending on the wording of the order, the notice can be given either before or after the relevant disposal. This form of order is less onerous than a typical freezing injunction. Although such orders have been sought and obtained before, this was the first case where the relevant jurisdiction to make such an order was fully discussed. As such, it throws light on the test that the court will apply before making such an order, as well as the likely form of such an order.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Holyoake & anor v Candy & ors [2016] EWHC 970 (Ch)

    Kazakhstan Kagazy plc & ors v Arip [2014] EWCA Civ 381

    National Bank Trust v Yurov & ors [2016] EWHC 1913 (Comm)

    Tasarruf Mevduati Sigorta Fonu v Merrill Lynch Bank and Trust Company (Cayman) Ltd & ors [2011] UKPC 17

    VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corporation & ors [2012] EWCA Civ 808