“This House Believes that the Freezing Order is the Greatest Invention of the Common Law Courts”

Tuesday, 10 November 2026

9:00 am - 11:00 am

DIFC FinTech Hive (Get Directions)

The freezing order is one of the most powerful tools developed by the common law courts to preserve the effectiveness of judicial proceedings and prevent the dissipation or concealment of assets. However, its far-reaching impact raises important questions about the balance between protecting legal rights, ensuring justice and maintaining commercial certainty.

This session will explore these questions through a formal debate, rather than a conventional panel discussion. Two teams of experienced legal practitioners will present opposing positions on the motion:

“This House Believes that the Freezing Order Is the Greatest Invention of the Common Law Courts.”

The debate will explore the evolution and significance of freezing orders, their role in preserving assets and securing the effectiveness of proceedings, and their importance in commercial litigation, international disputes and arbitration-related proceedings. It will also examine concerns surrounding their potentially disproportionate impact on respondents and third parties, and the need to protect property rights and legitimate commercial activity.

Particular attention will be given to the application of freezing orders in the UAE, including their interaction with the local legal framework, cross-border asset recovery, and the enforcement of judgments and arbitral awards.

A panel of three distinguished judges will preside over the debate, engaging with the arguments advanced by both sides and assessing the competing legal and practical perspectives. Following the conclusion of the debate, the judges will offer their closing observations and reflections on whether the freezing order truly deserves its place among the greatest innovations of the common law courts.

Bringing together advocacy, legal analysis and judicial insight, the session promises a lively and thought-provoking examination of a remedy that lies at the intersection of procedural innovation, commercial necessity and the pursuit of justice.

Speakers –

The debate will feature two teams of leading legal practitioners. For the motion, Stephen Doherty (Serle Court) and Robert Whitehead (HAS Law Firm) will argue in favour of freezing orders, while against the motion, Zoe O’Sullivan KC (Serle Court) and Rachel Mannam (HAS Law Firm) will challenge their position.

The debate will be presided over by three distinguished judges: Rupert Reed KC (Serle Court), Michael Pachett-Joyce (3 Hare Court), and Justice Ravindra Bhatt (Retired Judge, Supreme Court of India), who will offer their observations and reflections at the conclusion.