Under what circumstance may freezing or ancillary orders be issued against a respondent?

The correct choice reflects the principle that freezing or ancillary orders may apply to a broader range of parties than just those directly involved in the primary litigation. These orders can be issued to prevent a respondent from dealing with their assets, thus preserving them for a potential judgment in related proceedings.

This option is supported by the understanding that a freezing order is a protective measure designed to ensure that a respondent does not dissipate their assets during the course of legal proceedings, which may ultimately affect the outcome of the case. The essential focus is on the nature of the order—aimed at protecting the interests of the applicant—rather than solely on the status of the respondent in relation to the substantive claim.

In legal practice, persons who are not parties to the main proceedings can still be affected by ancillary orders, as these orders seek to safeguard the enforcement of a future judgment. Therefore, the existence or absence of direct involvement in the primary suit does not preclude the issuance of such orders against them. This characteristic underscores the flexibility of the court's power to ensure the effectiveness of judicial outcomes.