Freezing across the Atlantic

In an important judgment in May 2008, the High Court in London rejected a challenge to an application by the US Securities & Exchange Commission for the freezing of assets in pursuit of a civil action in the US courts, which the defendant asserted was penal in nature. The SEC was also exempted from giving a cross-undertaking in damages under the ‘dispensation rule’. Jonathan Lennon, who appeared as junior counsel for the defence, examines the decision.

Jonathan Lennon is a barrister at 23 Essex Street (www.23es.com; tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 0353) London. Mr Manterfield’s legal representation was led by Jonathan Fisher QC (www.jonathan-fisher.co.uk)

Judgment in the case of United States Securities & Exchange Commission v Glenn Manterfield [2008] EWHC 1349 (QBD) was given by Sir Charles Grey on 16 May 2008 following the Securities & Exchange Commission’s (SEC) earlier successful application for an interim order freezing Manterfield’s (“M”) assets held in England and Switzerland. It would have been an unremarkable Mareva type case but for two challenges made by M.