Receiver was validly appointed over debtor’s assets

By order of the High Court dated 2nd February, 2017, the plaintiff obtained judgment against the first named defendant in the sum of €3,256,217.49 together with interest - court placed a stay on the execution of the judgment for a period of twelve months but by order of the High Court dated 28th April, 2017, the stay was lifted in circumstances where the first named defendant declined to furnish undertakings as sought by the bank - second and third named defendants were joined on the basis that they were interfering with the process of execution and were assisting the first defendant to put his assets beyond the reach of the judgment creditors - in March 2018 the first named defendant sought an order setting aside the appointment of the receiver by way of equitable execution over certain bank accounts in the name of the first defendant - first defendant’s solicitor drew the court’s attention to the Civil Procedure Rules in England and Wales - application to appoint receiver - ample evidence to show that the first defendant had failed to comply with the judgment and had taken steps, with the assistance of the second and third named defendants, to put assets beyond the reach of the judgment creditor - no notice of motion to vacate the appointment of the receiver in this case as per Order 124 RSC - appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution does amount to the exercise of a power which has a significant impact on a debtor in that it removes those funds from his control - objections raised by first defendant were of a technical nature and related to application to appoint receiver - no order made discharging the receiver.