A Mareva injunction has a different function or objective than a preservation order. The difference was described in MacMillan v. Northstar Tool Corporation, 2009 BCSC 148, at paragraph 7 as follows: An order made to preserve property [under Rule 46] is not akin to a Mareva injunction. The latter is obtained to prevent a potential judgment debtor from removing assets from the jurisdiction that would satisfy the judgment. The latter relief is granted before judgment and therefore the onus upon the applicant is more stringent and requires the applicant, among other things, to show a strong prima facie case…
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.