This might also interest you...

Commercial Court erratic behaviour of freezing order respondent

1 Sep 2016

The case of Banque Cantonale Geneve v Sanomi concerned a Swiss bank which provided finance to an offshore oil company for the charter of a vessel and its cargo of petrol, subject to an undertaking by the company that the cargo would not be unloaded without the bank’s agreement and subject to charges over property for security. The bank later discovered that the cargo had been unloaded, and the properties either had ownership issues or had been sold. The bank obtained a freezing order against the company and issued proceedings to recover the monies provided as finance.


In deciding whether to continue the freezing order, the court required ‘solid evidence’ of a real risk that the company wouldn’t pay.  In assessing whether there is such evidence, the court held that it could take into account the company’s behaviour in unloading the cargo and selling properties.  The court found that that behaviour had demonstrated “an unacceptably low standard of commercial morality”.


The case illustrates that evasive and misleading behaviour is likely to count against respondents to freezing orders to the extent that such orders may be made or continued against them.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

Please reload

  • FB
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Youtube

Short Richardson & Forth, 4 Mosley Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 1DE

Tel: +44 (0)191 232 0283  ·  Email:


Short Richardson and Forth Solicitors Limited is a private limited company registered in England and Wales under company number 10572065, authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority No 637150.

Short Richardson and Forth Solicitors Limited is a private limited company constituted and run in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act 2006. The term “partner” has been used to denote individual senior solicitors employed by Short Richardson and Forth Solicitors Limited.