Miss World: Your tiny hand is, er assets are, frozen

Miss World's coronation went ahead on Saturday- only the second time that a woman from a predominently Muslim country has won, again raising questions about the independence of the contest which was withdrawn from Nigeria at the last minute because of rioting and killings in the mainly Muslim north, apparently following comments that the Mohammad would have have approved of the event and might even have married one of the contestants.

But the mere fact that at least 200 people were dead as a result of the rioting was not the only problem facing the contest.

More than that - the girls, pampered in hot and sunny Nigeria, were in London in December and the temperature struggles to get above freezing. And it rains cold, penetrating rain that gets into the bones. Professional smiles abounded.

Worse, with about 24 hours to go, a Nigerian woman's lawyers were at the High Court in London asking a Judge for help. And help he did: late on Friday night, an order was granted freezing the assets of the organisers.

The woman claims she is owed about GBP500,000 for a dinner bill. To get an injunction of that sort requires two things: one is a credible case and the other is an undertaking to the Court to make good any losses the defendant may suffer as a result of the freezing order, if it is found to have been unfounded.

The Court must have been satisfied that the woman could afford to pay the losses that would have been suffered by the organisers had the event, planned for Saturday evening at North London's Alexander Palace (historically the torture chamber for those taking professional examinations), in a district of London that borders one of the UK's largest Jewish populations and aside from a superb Turkish deli and a couple of kebab shops has little evidence of Muslim presence.

So, here lies an interesting question: if the Financial Action Task Force goes ahead with its sanctions against Nigeria (due to automatically trigger on 15th December, less than a week away) and if (note the IF) there is an order against the woman, who will be the first to make a report in accordance with those "counter-measures?"

Will it be her solicitors (if they get money from her), her UK bankers, if she has them or the Solicitors' bankers if they receive the money, the bankers for the lawyers for event organisers, if the money is transferred to them or the solicitors acting for them (if they receive the money) or the bankers for those solicitors (same caveat)? And if the money is sent from one firm of solicitors to the other, as the source of the funds is known, will the receiving firm make a report about the sending firm?

The result of the Miss World contest is already known.

But the continuing controversies include that it looks like being the test case for how effective the demand for reporting will be when the sanctions kick in.