Considerations and Cautions for Freezing Orders

    View Author April 2020

    A worldwide freezing order (WFO) was refused in Arcelormittal USA LLC v Ruia and others [2020] EWHC 740 (Comm) because the application failed on all grounds of the test. The claimant had not shown it had a good arguable case, nor that it was entitled to the US$1.5 billion claimed, nor that there was a solid risk of dissipation.

    The WFO would be gravely detrimental to the respondent’s business and its main lender, there had been eight months’ delay in bringing the application, and it was sought against persons and assets out of the jurisdiction for which particular caution is needed.