oa Advocate - A Mareva Interdict

Volume 8, Issue 1
  • ISSN : 1012-8743



When Stegmann J handed down judgment in the matter of Knox D'Arcy v Jamieson, the view was expressed to me that there was nothing new in this judgment and that the idea that someone could obtain some sort of freezing order on a defendant's assets prior to judgment was an unsurprising one, and one that had been used on many occasions in the past. I suspect that this attitude reflects a somewhat unimaginative view of law and the nature of legal development. In effect, it says that there is nothing new under the sun. For that matter, the so, called Mareva injunction was implicit in the Twelve Tables, or even the primeval slime, and from first principles like those, such refinements as procedures for the attachment of assets prior to judgment are mere swift corollaries of a lawyer's cogitations.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Article metrics loading...


This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error