The Court of Appeal's judgment of 22 September 2026 concerns whether a freezing order application against third-party recipients of a judgment debtor's money can be served on them in Spain.
Key facts
- Who: Judgment creditors seeking freezing orders against third parties abroad; people and companies said to have received money from a judgment debtor.
- From: 22 September 2026 (judgment date)
- Source: Benjamin Gilbert & Anor v Broadoak Private Finance Limited [2026] EWCA Civ 1172
Mr Benjamin Gilbert and his company BG Projects Limited invested in Broadoak Private Finance Limited, an English company that provided finance for commercial property investment. Between 2017 and 2019 they advanced substantial loans that were not repaid. They obtained a default judgment of £3,314,303.19 on 8 December 2023 and a further award of £2,186,240.22 on 20 June 2025.
To enforce the judgment they obtained freezing orders against Broadoak and against its majority shareholder, Mr Bleakley. Third-party disclosure from Broadoak's bank showed that about £5m had been removed from its account. The evidence suggested about £800,000 met personal spending and £3.8m was paid to an account with TT Moneycorp Ltd. A Norwich Pharmacal order against Moneycorp revealed that €2.55m had been paid to a Spanish bank account in Mrs Bleakley's name, and that other money may have benefited a Spanish company, King Street Capital SL.
On 30 July 2025 a judge granted a without-notice freezing order against Mrs Bleakley and the company. A Deputy High Court Judge ([2026] EWHC 153 (Comm)) later found good reason to suppose the payments were made for no proper purpose and that there was a risk of dissipation. He rejected the respondents' challenges save one: he held that no gateway under paragraph 3.1 of Practice Direction 6B allowed the application to be served out of the jurisdiction on the respondents in Spain. He added that, had a gateway applied, he would have found England clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum.
The appeal was heard on 23 July 2026 before Lord Justice Jeremy Baker, Lord Justice Miles and Lord Justice Foxton, and Lord Justice Foxton gave the judgment. The creditors had permission to argue that a freezing order claim is a claim "under an enactment which allows proceedings to be brought", relying on section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981. They built the argument on three developments: Orexim (2018), the Privy Council's decision in Broad Idea (2021) and Gorbachev v Guriev (2023).
The court refused permission to appeal on two further gateways, one for injunctions about acts within the jurisdiction and one for claims relating to property within the jurisdiction. It concluded that those grounds had no realistic prospect of success.
What this means for creditors and third-party recipients
- The judgment concerns the gateways in paragraph 3.1 of Practice Direction 6B for serving freezing order applications on respondents in Spain.
- The Deputy Judge had found that none of the gateways applied; the Court of Appeal refused permission on two of the three gateways relied on, as set out above.
Sources
- Benjamin Gilbert & Anor v Broadoak Private Finance Limited [2026] EWCA Civ 1172, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 22 September 2026: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2026/1172