The evolution, utility and effectiveness of the Mareva jurisdiction in English law : a critical appraisal
The Mareva injunction has been available in England for 40 years. Initially, the Mareva injunction was a contentious form of relief; today it is regarded as an exceptionally effective device in common law jurisdictions across the globe. This body of work critically appraises the development, evoluti...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Published: |
Lancaster University
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.724349 |
| Summary: | The Mareva injunction has been available in England for 40 years. Initially, the Mareva injunction was a contentious form of relief; today it is regarded as an exceptionally effective device in common law jurisdictions across the globe. This body of work critically appraises the development, evolution and effectiveness of the Mareva injunction. It is primarily established that the Mareva injunction is an equitable remedy. A corollary crystallises; in order to gain a fuller understanding of the Mareva injunction it is necessary to contextualise it within the equitable jurisdiction. Traditional doctrinal research methods explicate the development of the equitable jurisdiction drawing attention to certain characteristics, common themes, techniques and principles. Equity becomes the contextual framework upon which the ensuing discourse is rendered. At its heart equity is found to be about remedies; a supplementary system which repairs defects in the law. The Mareva injunction was devised to ring fence amenable assets on a temporary basis; to protect the possibility of an effective remedy. The continuing effectiveness of the Mareva injunction is examined in relation to evolving externalities such as the rise of globalisation inclusive of developing financial infrastructures and improving technologies. The action taken by the courts to overcome the difficulties presented by the abovementioned evolving conditions are evaluated. The range of ancillary and connected orders of the court which have been created or refined in order to ensure that the Mareva injunction remains effective are critically appraised. It is argued that the Mareva injunction can no longer be viewed in isolation; it is part of an evolving matrix of interconnected devices which characterise the modern Mareva jurisdiction. |
|---|