Freezing injunctions against third parties—the Chabra jurisdiction
Freezing injunctions against third parties—the Chabra jurisdiction

The following Dispute Resolution practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Freezing injunctions against third parties—the Chabra jurisdiction
  • What is the ‘Chabra jurisdiction’?
  • What is the test for granting a freezing injunction against a third party?
  • When are third party assets caught by the Chabra jurisdiction?
  • Chabra relief where the NCAD doesn’t hold any assets
  • Procedural considerations
  • Examples of the Chabra jurisdiction in practice

Freezing injunctions against third parties—the Chabra jurisdiction

This Practice Note discusses freezing injunctions against third parties rather than a defendant in proceedings. For guidance on freezing injunctions against defendants rather than third parties, see Practice Note: Freezing injunctions—guiding principles.

What is the ‘Chabra jurisdiction’?

The Chabra jurisdiction (named after Mummery J’s decision in TSB International v Chabra) refers to the court’s jurisdiction to grant a freezing injunction against a third party against whom the claimant asserts no cause of action (a non-cause of action defendant or NCAD) provided that the injunction is 'ancillary and incidental' to a claim in respect of a defendant against whom the claimant does assert a cause of action (a cause of action defendant or CAD).

In TSB International v Chabra, a freezing order was granted against a third-party company where there was a good arguable case that the assets apparently vested in the name of the company were in fact beneficially the property of the CAD (Mr Chabra), and therefore those assets, or at least some of them, might be available to satisfy the claimant's claims against Mr Chabra should the claimant be successful at trial.

What is the test for granting a freezing injunction against a third party?

The High Court in The New York Laser Clinic Ltd v Naturastudios Ltd set out three questions that the court needs to consider (see para [83]):

Popular documents