Jersey: Jersey Freezing Orders

Last Updated: 28 December 2016
Article by Richard Brown



A number of court decisions have demonstrated that discretionary trust assets are not always immune from freezing injunctions obtained against settlors/beneficiaries.


A freezing injunction is likely to impact the trustee's duties and the day-to-day administration of the trust, and may lead to trustees being dragged into proceedings even if they are not alleged to have been involved in or aware of wrongdoing on the part of the settlor.


An understanding of the approach of the courts, including those in Jersey, to this issue.

The purpose of a standard freezing injunction is to freeze the defendant's assets,1 on an interim basis or post-judgment, so that they are available for the enforcement of a future judgment. In circumstances in which valuable assets can be moved to an obscure jurisdiction on the basis of a simple share-transfer form, the freezing injunction is an essential part of a litigator's armoury.

However, if a defendant has settled their assets on discretionary trusts, they no longer own them. Even if the defendant is a beneficiary, their rights do not confer any legal or beneficial interest in the trust assets.2 Such assets will therefore not be caught by a standard freezing order and would not be available for enforcement.

The idea that sophisticated defendants should be able to abuse trust structures to make themselves judgment-proof is obviously unattractive. Courts' desire to do justice in such circumstances has, on occasion, led to decisions that have raised eyebrows among trust practitioners by seeming to ignore the fundamental principles of trust law.

Aside from obvious policy concerns, the practical implications for a trustee who becomes subject to the terms of a freezing order can be serious.3 The restrictions imposed on the trustee by the injunction may well conflict with the day-to-day administration of the trust, but a breach of the order can lead to a finding of contempt. Can distributions be made? What about investments? What are the trustee's disclosure obligations, and how do these tie in with the duty of confidentiality? Should applications be made to the court for directions? All these questions are likely to arise, and the answers will not always be straightforward.


It is well established that, if it can be shown that a trust was invalidly settled, the court can and will bring the trust assets within the scope of a freezing order – assuming that the other requirements for the granting of an injunction have been met. Alternatively, if the claimant can assert their own proprietary claim in respect of the trust assets – for example, if they are able to make out a claim in constructive trust – they may be entitled to a proprietary freezing injunction over the trust assets.

The simple question in these cases is whether the defendant (or, in the case of a proprietary claim, the claimant) ultimately has some ownership right to the trust assets that will enable a judgment to be enforced against them. So far, so simple.


A number of decisions have seen the courts move away from the beneficial-ownership test when it has appeared too restrictive to enable justice to be done. As Deputy Judge Bartley Jones QC said in Dadourian Group International Inc v Azury Ltd: 'I do not believe that it is necessary to establish beneficial ownership in the strict trust law sense... [the jurisdiction to freeze trust assets] can still be exercised if the defendant has some right in respect of, or control over, or other rights of access to the assets. The important issue... is substantive control.'4

Unsurprisingly, many trust practitioners, particularly those in Jersey and other jurisdictions with well-regulated trust industries, consider that the Dadourian decision rode roughshod over fundamental principles of trust law. In Algosaibi v Saad Investments Co Ltd,5 the Cayman Court of Appeal endorsed this sentiment, ruling that 'substantive control' is not, of itself, suff cient to found jurisdiction to grant Mareva relief: 'It is necessary to identify some process of enforcement which would (or might) lead to the assets of the [trust] becoming available to satisfy the judgment which the claimant may obtain.'


These principles have recently been examined in the decision of the England and Wales Court of Appeal in JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev.6 Lord Justice Lewison's leading judgment in that case has been interpreted in some quarters as endorsing a more relaxed approach to applications to freeze discretionary trust assets. However, a proper examination of the judgment does not necessarily justify such a view.7

The Court of Appeal ruled that there was jurisdiction to order a defendant to provide disclosure, pursuant to a worldwide freezing order over his assets, of information relating to trusts (of which he was a discretionary beneficiary) and their assets, even though the trust assets were not at that time within the scope of the freezing injunction.

The claimant had initially set out extensive evidence supporting its belief that the trust assets were still owned and controlled by the defendant. The defendant and trustees disputed this evidence. The Court held that it was not able to reach a view one way or the other.

The enhanced disclosure provision ordered by the Court would provide the claimant with an 'opportunity to test its assertion that [the defendant] is the effective owner of those assets against his (and the trustees') assertion that he is not. If its assertion is correct, it may then be in a position to apply for the scope of the freezing order to be widened.'8 Lewison LJ stated that the purpose of the order was to enable a conclusion to be reached as to whether 'by one means or another trust assets would be susceptible to enforcement'.9 In so ruling, the Court appeared tacitly to endorse the stricter approach in Algosaibi and not the more lenient approach in Dadourian.


The Jersey Royal Court is, unsurprisingly, generally unwilling to depart from trust-law orthodoxy. In Re Esteem Settlement,10 the Royal Court held that principles of 'piercing the veil' did not apply to trusts, and that there was no halfway house between validity and invalidity. A plaintiff wishing to enforce a judgment against discretionary trust assets needed to show that the trust was invalidly settled, or that the act of settling the assets on trust was a voidable transaction defrauding creditors.

In Tantular v AG,11 the Court held that: 'In our judgment, it is incompatible with fundamental principles of trust law to assert that a discretionary beneficiary of a trust is "beneficially entitled" to all – or indeed any – of the assets of the trust. The true position is that he has no right to any of those assets unless or until the trustees decide in their discretion to make an appointment to him and he then becomes beneficially entitled only to such assets as are appointed to him.'12

Despite these strident rulings, however, discretionary trust assets are not immune from freezing injunctions in Jersey. In Esteem, the Court accepted that, when freezing injunctions were sought without notice, in circumstances where assets 'seemed to have disappeared into offshore structures of one sort or another amid allegations of fraud', there were likely to be grounds to bring such assets within the scope of the freezing order.13

As the then Deputy Bailiff of Jersey said in Africa Edge v Incat Equipment Rental Ltd: 'It is clear... that the courts do, on occasion, grant a freezing injunction in respect of trust assets where there is a claim against a settlor or a beneficiary, because at that stage it is not known whether there will be some ground for attributing the assets in the trust to the alleged debtor. For example he may have put the assets in there at a time when he was insolvent, or the trust may be a sham, or other matters.'14


There are clearly cases where a plaintiff may get the benefit of the doubt at the ex parte stage when there are unanswered questions as to the ownership of the trust assets. But where will the line be drawn?

The Royal Court of Jersey regards English and Welsh case law as highly persuasive, if not authoritative, in this area – see the Algosaibi enforcement test endorsed in Pugachev. However, a plaintiff will have some prospect of obtaining a freezing order that includes the trust assets if they present sufficient evidence at the ex parte stage that a trust may be invalid, or that there is some other ground to suspect that the defendant retains some degree of ownership or control, and where there is evidence of a real risk of dissipation if a freezing order is not granted. Such an order will bind the trustee, as a party cited, even where there are no allegations of wrongdoing or involvement on the part of the trustee.

If the defendant or the trustee objects to the injunction, then either or both of them may apply to set it aside by opposing the evidence put forward by the claimant. The impact of the Pugachev decision may be that, where the court is not able to reach a view as to ownership of the trust assets, it now has the option of extending the disclosure provisions of the injunction before making a final decision on whether to include the trust assets within the scope of the freezing order itself.

The lesson for trustees is that discretionary trust assets are not immune from freezing injunctions, even where there are no allegations of wrongdoing or culpable knowledge on the part of the trustee. This is not necessarily the result of fundamental principles of trust law being cast aside by courts in freezing injunction cases. Rather, it is the result of courts of equity taking steps, in appropriate cases, to prevent legitimate trust structures from being abused to the detriment of creditors. Where exactly the line will be drawn, however, continues to be unclear.


1 Or, in the case of a proprietary freezing injunction, assets (which may be in the hands of a third party) to which the plaintiff asserts an ownership right

2 Gartside v IRC [1968] AC 553, confirmed by the Jersey Royal Court in Tantular v AG [2014] JRC 128

3 In England, the trustee might be joined as a 'non-cause of action defendant', although the terms of the standard freezing order are considered broad enough to bind third parties who are served with the order and who are within the jurisdiction of the court. In Jersey, the trustee would be joined to the proceedings as a 'party cited', whose obligations under the order are explicitly spelled out, but usually include disclosure obligations and orders restraining the trustee from disposing of assets

4 [2005] EWHC 1768 (Ch), paragraph 30

5 CICA 1 of 2010, 15 February 2011

6 [2016] 1 WLR 160

7 While a subsequent decision of the Court of Appeal in the same case ([2015] EWCA Civ 906 (14 August 2015)) did endorse the extension of the freezing orders to the trust assets, that decision was made in the context of flagrant and serious breaches by the defendant of the Court's previous orders (including the disclosure orders previously made by the Court), as well as the presentation of further evidence satisfying the Court that the trust assets were in reality the defendant's assets

8 [2016] 1 WLR 160 per Lewison LJ at paragraph 58

9 Ibid, paragraph 59

10 [2003] JLR 188

11 [2014] JRC 128

12 Ibid, paragraph 30 (see also AG v Rosenlund [2016] JRC 062). Similar principles will apply to Jersey foundations – s25 of the Foundations (Jersey) Law 2009 specifically provides that a beneficiary of a foundation has no interest in its assets

13 Re Esteem Settlement [2003] JRC 092, paragraph 96

14 [2008] JRC 175

Previously published in WWW.STEP.ORG/JOURNAL | DECEMBER 2016/JANUARY 2017

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
28 Nov 2017, Conference, London, UK

BVCA's tax, legal and regulatory conference takes place on 28 November 2017 at Savoy Place, London.

24 Jan 2018, Conference, St Peter Port, Guernsey

In association with the Guernsey Training Agency, we are pleased to offer a unique, interactive event that will explore the role of integrity in the modern employment relationship, with a particular focus on the financial services sector.

15 Mar 2018, Seminar, St Peter Port, Guernsey

We are once again sponsoring C5 Fraud, Asset Tracing & Recovery which is due to take place on 15-16 March 2018 (tbc) in Geneva.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.