Roupell v Zhang

The plaintiff in Roupell v Zhang sought a freezing order against the defendant, who had been engaged to install an air conditioner in the plaintiff's home. A fire caused by the installation destroyed the home, leading to a dispute over liability and compensation. The case was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the plaintiff sought to freeze the defendant's assets to secure any future judgment.

The primary legal issue was whether the plaintiff had established a risk of dissipation of the defendant's assets, which is a necessary condition for granting a freezing order. The court considered whether the prospect of the defendant's impending insolvency alone was sufficient to justify a freezing order. Additionally, the court examined whether the plaintiff had demonstrated the defendant's lack of probity or provided evidence that the defendant would take steps to make himself proof against a judgment debt.

The court determined that the plaintiff had not demonstrated a sufficient risk of dissipation of the defendant's assets. The court found that the prospect of impending insolvency was not, by itself, a sufficient reason to grant a freezing order. Furthermore, there was no evidence that the defendant would take steps to make himself proof against a judgment debt, nor had the plaintiff demonstrated the defendant's lack of probity. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for a freezing order. The court's decision highlighted the need for the plaintiff to establish a clear risk of dissipation and other grounds for a freezing order.