In Lord Leggatt’s view, the House of Lords failed to appreciate the principle upon which the practice of freezing orders was established – and that it was not dependent on the claimant having a cause of action against the person being injuncted. On the facts of The Siskina, that left the owners of a sunken cargo ship unable to obtain compensation from those responsible. In The Siskina, what upset Lord Denning was the view of the Law Lords that the English court lacked power to grant an interlocutory injunction against a person unless the claimant had a cause of action against them, which the claimant could enforce against them in the English court. So, he declares, now is the time to provide it. On the other, he laments how in doing so the courts have lacked a ‘satisfactory theoretical foundation’ to underpin these decisions. On one hand, he extols the flexibility demonstrated over the years to ensure that the law and its procedures keep abreast of societal changes. It is a magisterial review of how the courts have, since first granting ‘Mareva’ injunctions, extended on a piecemeal basis the circumstances in which the common law provides litigants with an interim remedy either to hold the ring or to enable claimants to secure the evidence to vindicate their rights at trial. Lord Leggatt’s judgment will surely now be added to law school syllabuses across the world. His boldness in doing so stems not just from overturning a House of Lords authority of 44 years’ standing but doing so in a 4-3 split decision in which the minority comprises the president of the Supreme Court (Lord Reed), deputy president (Lord Hodge) and Lord Denning’s successor as master of the rolls (Sir Geoffrey Vos). He wrote the majority judgment in Convoy Collateral. One justice making his mark is Lord Leggatt, appointed to the highest court as recently as April 2020. You begin to observe the different personalities demonstrating intellectual prowess while seeking to influence the development of the law.
For most litigation solicitors, this is a once in a career opportunity, if that.
In the case of Convoy Collateral Ltd v Broad Idea International Ltd UKPC 24, a seven-member board has overturned the House of Lords decision in The Siskina AC 210, rewriting the juridical basis for the grant of freezing orders and other interim injunctions.Īcting as a Privy Council agent enables one to attend appeal hearings before justices of the UK Supreme Court. Over 40 years later, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has declared that the House of Lords got it wrong.
0 kommentar(er)
