This paper is an investigation of freezing properties related to subjects and objects. Starting out by giving an account of the most prominent Norwegian properties, it then turns to a comparative study between primarily English and Norwegian indirect objects. This comparative study will be shown to have important consequences for the approach to indirect objects. It will be argued that although recent studies are able to capture central aspects of indirect objects, they are inadequate when it comes to accounting for freezing properties. In the present paper, freezing effects are understood in terms of agreement properties, most notably Case agreement. It is shown that both subjects and indirect objects disallow sub-extraction in both English in Norwegian, but that whereas English does not allow the indirect object to A-bar move, Norwegian allows this A-bar movement. The paper argues that this relates to whether Case is structural or inherent. As such, this paper offers a new argument in favor of Case as a central ingredient in deriving freezing effects.