S1 by her tutor S2 v T

In the case of S1 by her tutor S2 v T, the plaintiff, S1, sought a freezing order against the defendant, T, to prevent the dissipation of funds held in trust by T's solicitor. The dispute involved a significant sum of money held in trust and the plaintiff alleged that the defendant was attempting to dissipate these funds. The plaintiff also claimed that she had a good arguable case against the defendant and that the funds were necessary to cover any potential liability for legal expenses.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the plaintiff had a good arguable case against the defendant and if the defendant had incurred a liability that justified the freezing order. The court had to consider the balance of convenience in favour of the plaintiff and whether there was a risk of dissipation of assets. Additionally, the court examined the necessity of the funds to cover potential legal expenses if the plaintiff's case was successful.

The court found that the plaintiff had a good arguable case against the defendant and that the balance of convenience favoured the granting of a freezing order. The court recognised the risk of dissipation of assets and the necessity of preserving the funds to cover potential liability for legal expenses. Consequently, the court ordered that the defendant deposit $40,000 into a controlled money account held by the defendant's solicitors, Greenfield Lawyers. The defendant was permitted to use these funds to meet existing liabilities for legal fees and any legal fees incurred in defending the proceedings. The court dismissed the defendant's notice of motion, and the plaintiff's costs of the motion were awarded as costs in the proceedings.