File #2406: "2018_Book_ACrossBorderStudyOfFreezingOrd.pdf"
Testo
1|Preface|7
1|Contents|10
1|1 Introduction|13
2|1.1 The Problem Stated and the Roadmap to the Monograph|13
2|1.2 Terminology Caveats|14
2|References|17
1|2 Provisional Measures in France and the United Kingdom|19
2|2.1 Background|19
2|2.2 Definitions: The French Saisie Conservatoire|20
3|2.2.1 Saisie Conservatoire in Comparison to the Référé|21
2|2.3 Definitions: The English Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|22
2|2.4 The Basic Problem: Locating a Debtor’s Assets and Preventing Their Removal|24
2|2.5 The Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|25
3|2.5.1 Historical Origins of the Freezing Order or Mareva Injunction|25
3|2.5.2 The Key Characteristics of the Mareva Injunction|27
3|2.5.3 Expansion of the Scope of Mareva Injunctions and Freezing Orders|28
2|2.6 The Saisie Conservatoire|30
3|2.6.1 A Brief Legislative History of the Saisie Conservatoire|30
3|2.6.2 The Key Characteristics of the Saisie Conservatoire|31
2|2.7 The Procedure for Obtaining a Saisie Conservatoire and Mareva Injunction Freezing Order|33
3|2.7.1 The Procedure for Obtaining the Saisie Conservatoire|33
3|2.7.2 The Procedure for Obtaining a Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|35
2|2.8 On the Role of Contempt of Court Rules|37
2|2.9 A Comparison of the Saisie Conservatoire and the Freezing Order Mareva Injunction as Remedies for a Creditor Seeking to Enforce a Claim|40
3|2.9.1 Speed, Simplicity and Cost|40
3|2.9.2 The Consequences of Obtaining a Saisie Conservatoire and Freezing Order and the Effect of the Order|40
3|2.9.3 Counter Security or Undertakings in Damages|41
3|2.9.4 Ancillary Orders Which Can Be Granted by the Courts to Assist Enforcement of Provisional Measures|41
2|2.10 Jurisdiction, Recognition and Enforceability of Freezing Orders in EU Member States—Potential Conflicts and Uncertainties|42
3|2.10.1 General Considerations|42
3|2.10.2 Jurisdiction-Related Issues|43
3|2.10.3 Recognition and Enforcement of Mareva Injunction Freezing Order by Member States of the European Union|45
3|2.10.4 Worldwide Freezing Orders Before French Courts and the European Court of Justice|45
2|2.11 Conclusions|48
2|References|51
1|3 Provisional Measures in the United States|54
2|3.1 A Brief History of US Law on Provisional Measures|55
2|3.2 Synopsys of US Law on Provisional Measures|58
3|3.2.1 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure|58
3|3.2.2 State Law Variations|62
3|3.2.3 Constitutional Due Process Limitations Common to Prejudgment Remedies|63
3|3.2.4 The Uniform Asset-Protection Orders Act 2012|64
2|3.3 Mareva Injunctions and the US System of Provisional Measures: Differences and Commonalities|66
3|3.3.1 The American Provisional Measures v. the English Mareva Injunction: The Main Inherent Limitations of the American System|66
3|3.3.2 The American Provisional Measures v. the English Mareva Injunction: Policy and Practical Differences|68
3|3.3.3 The Tokens of Efficiency of the American System|70
2|3.4 Positioning US Law|72
2|References|73
1|4 Post-socialist Jurisdictions: Provisional Measures in Hungary|76
2|4.1 The Limits of Research: On the Hungarian Legal System and Scholarship|77
2|4.2 An Overview of the History of Provisional Measures in Hungary in Modern Times (1867—Present Time)|79
2|4.3 Present Time Statutory Law|81
3|4.3.1 A Terminology Caveat|81
3|4.3.2 The Main Features of the Law on Provisional Measures|82
2|4.4 What Contemporary Hungarian Court Cases Can Tell Us About Ex Parte and Other Provisional Measures|83
3|4.4.1 Case Law as a Source for Analysis: Limitations and Key Features|83
3|4.4.2 Why a Mareva Injunction-Type Ex Parte Provisional Measure Is Needed in Hungary?|84
3|4.4.3 What Are Non-Ex Parte Provisional Measures Used for in Hungary?|86
2|4.5 Contempt of Court Rules in Hungary|89
2|4.6 Positioning Hungarian Law on the European and Global Landscape|90
2|References|91
1|5 The European Account Preservation Order: Nuclear Weapon or Paper Tiger?|94
2|References|97
1|6 Conclusions and Possible Ways Forward|98
1|Contents|10
1|1 Introduction|13
2|1.1 The Problem Stated and the Roadmap to the Monograph|13
2|1.2 Terminology Caveats|14
2|References|17
1|2 Provisional Measures in France and the United Kingdom|19
2|2.1 Background|19
2|2.2 Definitions: The French Saisie Conservatoire|20
3|2.2.1 Saisie Conservatoire in Comparison to the Référé|21
2|2.3 Definitions: The English Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|22
2|2.4 The Basic Problem: Locating a Debtor’s Assets and Preventing Their Removal|24
2|2.5 The Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|25
3|2.5.1 Historical Origins of the Freezing Order or Mareva Injunction|25
3|2.5.2 The Key Characteristics of the Mareva Injunction|27
3|2.5.3 Expansion of the Scope of Mareva Injunctions and Freezing Orders|28
2|2.6 The Saisie Conservatoire|30
3|2.6.1 A Brief Legislative History of the Saisie Conservatoire|30
3|2.6.2 The Key Characteristics of the Saisie Conservatoire|31
2|2.7 The Procedure for Obtaining a Saisie Conservatoire and Mareva Injunction Freezing Order|33
3|2.7.1 The Procedure for Obtaining the Saisie Conservatoire|33
3|2.7.2 The Procedure for Obtaining a Mareva Injunction or Freezing Order|35
2|2.8 On the Role of Contempt of Court Rules|37
2|2.9 A Comparison of the Saisie Conservatoire and the Freezing Order Mareva Injunction as Remedies for a Creditor Seeking to Enforce a Claim|40
3|2.9.1 Speed, Simplicity and Cost|40
3|2.9.2 The Consequences of Obtaining a Saisie Conservatoire and Freezing Order and the Effect of the Order|40
3|2.9.3 Counter Security or Undertakings in Damages|41
3|2.9.4 Ancillary Orders Which Can Be Granted by the Courts to Assist Enforcement of Provisional Measures|41
2|2.10 Jurisdiction, Recognition and Enforceability of Freezing Orders in EU Member States—Potential Conflicts and Uncertainties|42
3|2.10.1 General Considerations|42
3|2.10.2 Jurisdiction-Related Issues|43
3|2.10.3 Recognition and Enforcement of Mareva Injunction Freezing Order by Member States of the European Union|45
3|2.10.4 Worldwide Freezing Orders Before French Courts and the European Court of Justice|45
2|2.11 Conclusions|48
2|References|51
1|3 Provisional Measures in the United States|54
2|3.1 A Brief History of US Law on Provisional Measures|55
2|3.2 Synopsys of US Law on Provisional Measures|58
3|3.2.1 The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure|58
3|3.2.2 State Law Variations|62
3|3.2.3 Constitutional Due Process Limitations Common to Prejudgment Remedies|63
3|3.2.4 The Uniform Asset-Protection Orders Act 2012|64
2|3.3 Mareva Injunctions and the US System of Provisional Measures: Differences and Commonalities|66
3|3.3.1 The American Provisional Measures v. the English Mareva Injunction: The Main Inherent Limitations of the American System|66
3|3.3.2 The American Provisional Measures v. the English Mareva Injunction: Policy and Practical Differences|68
3|3.3.3 The Tokens of Efficiency of the American System|70
2|3.4 Positioning US Law|72
2|References|73
1|4 Post-socialist Jurisdictions: Provisional Measures in Hungary|76
2|4.1 The Limits of Research: On the Hungarian Legal System and Scholarship|77
2|4.2 An Overview of the History of Provisional Measures in Hungary in Modern Times (1867—Present Time)|79
2|4.3 Present Time Statutory Law|81
3|4.3.1 A Terminology Caveat|81
3|4.3.2 The Main Features of the Law on Provisional Measures|82
2|4.4 What Contemporary Hungarian Court Cases Can Tell Us About Ex Parte and Other Provisional Measures|83
3|4.4.1 Case Law as a Source for Analysis: Limitations and Key Features|83
3|4.4.2 Why a Mareva Injunction-Type Ex Parte Provisional Measure Is Needed in Hungary?|84
3|4.4.3 What Are Non-Ex Parte Provisional Measures Used for in Hungary?|86
2|4.5 Contempt of Court Rules in Hungary|89
2|4.6 Positioning Hungarian Law on the European and Global Landscape|90
2|References|91
1|5 The European Account Preservation Order: Nuclear Weapon or Paper Tiger?|94
2|References|97
1|6 Conclusions and Possible Ways Forward|98