Ship arrest abroad not in breach of undertaking in worldwide freezing order
The Commercial Court decision in the case E v M  EWHC 895 (Comm) is of practical importance because there appears to be no previous authority on one of the principal points considered, namely whether a claimant who has obtained a worldwide freezing order (WFO) from the English Court will be in breach of the standard undertaking in the WFO (not to seek a similar order abroad without the court’s permission) if it subsequently arrests a vessel belonging to the defendant in another jurisdiction in order to obtain security for its claim.
Mr Justice Hamblen held that the arrest did not constitute a breach of the claimant’s undertaking in the WFO and refused to discharge the WFO…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Ince & Co briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Ince & Co
Surprise: claims for unpaid bunkers under bunker supply contracts are straightforward claims in debt where the passing of property is not required
Also: be specific in tripartite agreements; the right to rely on refund guarantees; and more.