What determines if a court has jurisdiction to make a freezing order?

A freezing order, which is a court order that restrains a party from disposing of or dealing with their assets, is primarily concerned with the need to protect the claimant's right to enforce a judgment. The court's jurisdiction to grant such an order often hinges on whether there are any assets belonging to the respondent present within the jurisdiction where the order is sought.

When determining jurisdiction for freezing orders, the presence of related assets is crucial because it directly impacts the court's ability to enforce any potential claim or judgment. If assets are located within the jurisdiction, the court can effectively supervise their preservation and ensure that the claimant's rights are protected. This aligns with the principles of ensuring that the court's orders are capable of being executed.

While the location of the applicant or respondent and the amount of the claim may play roles in broader jurisdictional discussions, they are not the primary determinants for granting a freezing order. The key factor is ensuring there are tangible assets within the court's jurisdiction that can be affected by the order, thereby justifying the court's intervention to safeguard the claimant's interests.