In Queensland, a plaintiff seeking a freezing order need not demonstrate that the defendant's purpose is to frustrate judgment; it suffices to show that the effect of the defendant's conduct would be to frustrate the prospective court processes of execution and enforcement. The English Court of Appeal's requirement of 'unjustifiable dissipation' in Candy v Holyoake [2017] EWCA Civ 92 does not represent the law in Australia. The risk of dissipation is often established by inference from circumstantial evidence, and the nature of the underlying allegations (not limited to dishonesty) may inform the risk assessment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 32 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 32 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.