Freezing Orders: The Ultimate Freezing Injunctions Guide
Imagine being involved in a commercial dispute, only to discover the other party is rapidly moving assets out of reach – emptying accounts, transferring property, or hiding wealth overseas. In such high-stakes situations, acting quickly is essential.
Freezing orders can prevent assets from being sold, transferred, or concealed. For claimants, they help lock down assets before they vanish, ensuring you have a fair chance of recovering what you’re owed. For defendants, knowing how to challenge or modify an injunction is crucial to safeguarding your financial stability.
This guide breaks down everything you need to know about freezing injunctions – how they work, when to use them, and how to fight them. Whether you need to secure assets or defend against an overreach, we’ll help you understand the legal process to protect your interests.
What is a freezing order?
A freezing order, sometimes called a freezing injunction, is a court order that prevents someone from selling, transferring, or otherwise dealing with certain assets while a legal case is ongoing. It acts as a safeguard to ensure assets remain available if a court rules in favour of the claimant.
Freezing injunctions at a glance:
- Prevents the transfer of assets during litigation in anticipation of a court order
- Commonly made in relation to a bank account, but can deal with a wide range of assets
- Can apply to assets within and outside the UK.
Because they impose strict financial restrictions on defendants, freezing orders are considered a serious and exceptional legal measure. As such, they are not granted recklessly. The court will only approve an application if there is strong evidence the defendant might move or hide their assets to avoid a potential judgment.
4 common types of freezing injunctions
1. Domestic freezing orders
A domestic asset freezing injunction- Depleting assets: Stopping reckless spending or strategic disposal of assets.
- Selling high-value assets: Blocking the sale of property, shares, vehicles, or valuables.
- Withdrawing large sums from bank accounts: Preventing bulk cash withdrawals that could make asset tracing more difficult.
- Transferring ownership to third parties: Stopping a defendant from shifting assets to family members or business associates.
- Using assets as collateral for loans: Preventing defendants from leveraging assets to create financial obligations that reduce their value.
- Prevent assets being transferred offshore: Stopping defendants from shifting funds or investments to jurisdictions with weak enforcement mechanisms.
2. Worldwide freezing orders (WFOs)
A worldwide freezing order extends beyond the borders of a single country, restraining a defendant from dealing with assets located anywhere in the world.
Worldwide freezing orders are often sought in international fraud cases or where there is evidence the defendant may attempt to hide assets across multiple jurisdictions.
A worldwide freezing order may be used to:
- Secure assets spread across multiple countries: Ensuring money, property, shares, and other holdings remain available.
- Restrict the sale of international real estate or businesses: Freezing high-value assets abroad that could be liquidated.
- Deter asset concealment through offshore structures: Preventing defendants from hiding wealth in trusts, shell companies, or undisclosed accounts.
Since WFOs apply beyond the UK, courts need strong evidence and a good reason to approve them. What’s more, unlike domestic freezing orders, a WFO does not automatically take effect in foreign jurisdictions. Enforcement requires legal action in each country where the assets are located.
3. Third-party freezing orders
Third-party freezing orders (also known as ‘Chabra’ injunctions) apply to assets held by individuals or entities who are not direct parties to the dispute but may be holding assets on behalf of the defendant.
If there is evidence that assets have been transferred to shell companies, associates, trusts, or other intermediaries to conceal assets and evade enforcement, a Chabra injunction may be used to freeze those assets.
4. Property freezing orders (PFOs)
A property freezing order (PFO) is a court order used to prevent a person or entity from dealing with or disposing of certain real estate assets while an investigation or legal proceedings are ongoing. Property freezing orders are commonly used in criminal and civil asset recovery cases.Assets affected by freezing injunctions
- Bank accounts
- Real estate properties
- Shares and securities
- Vehicles
- Business assets
- Cryptocurrency and digital assets
- Investments
- Personal valuables such as jewellery and artwork.
Benefits of freezing injunctions
A freezing order can be the difference between a successful claim and an unenforceable judgment. Here are some of the key benefits of freezing injunctions:
Prevents asset dissipation
A freezing order stops a defendant from hiding, transferring, or disposing of assets before a judgment against them can be enforced. Without this legal safeguard, even a successful claim could be meaningless if the defendant has emptied bank accounts, sold property, or moved funds offshore to avoid payment.
By locking down assets early, a freezing order ensures claimants have a realistic chance of recovering what they are owed.
Strengthens negotiating position
Defendants with a freezing order against them often face financial restrictions, making them more likely to engage in settlement negotiations. Since they cannot freely move or access their assets, they may be more inclined to resolve the dispute.
Helps deter fraudulent behaviour
Freezing injunctions act as a powerful deterrent against unlawful asset concealment. When potential wrongdoers are aware that courts can impose such orders, they may be less likely to engage in fraudulent activities or attempt to move assets out of reach.
How to apply for a freezing order
Obtaining a freezing order is a complex legal process that requires substantial evidence and justification. The key steps to obtaining a freezing injunction are set out below.
Filing a formal application
The first step in obtaining a freezing order is to file a formal application with the court. The process can be done in two ways:
- On notice: The defendant is informed of the application before the hearing. They have the opportunity to respond and present their case to the court.
- Ex parte (without notice): The defendant is not informed of the application. The court considers the request based only on the claimant’s evidence. This approach is usually taken in urgent cases where there is a real risk the defendant might move or hide assets if they become aware of the application.
To obtain a freezing order, the applicant must convince the court the injunction is necessary and justified. Courts do not grant these orders lightly, as they significantly restrict a defendant’s ability to access or deal with their assets.
To make a successful freezing order application, you must prove:
- You have a substantive claim: A freezing order cannot be granted in isolation; it must be linked to a legitimate legal claim against the defendant. The claim should be credible, well-documented, and supported by evidence.
- Risk of asset dissipation: You must show the defendant is likely to move, hide, or dispose of assets to avoid paying a future judgment. The risk must be real and imminent, not just a general concern.
- It is just to grant the order: The court will assess whether granting the freezing order is fair, proportionate, and necessary given the circumstances.
Providing assurances (undertaking)
The applicant must provide a ‘cross-undertaking’ when applying for a freezing order. This is a legal commitment to pay damages to compensate the defendant for any losses suffered if the court later decides the freezing order was unjust. This promise ensures claimants do not misuse freezing orders to target defendants unfairly.
Court hearings
The court will review the application and the supporting evidence before deciding whether to grant the freezing order. Every detail matters – from financial records to witness statements – as the court must be convinced issuing the order is fair, proportionate, and legally sound.
If the application is made ex parte (without notice), the judge will also assess whether withholding notice from the defendant is justified.
The judge may:
- Grant the order immediately
- Request further evidence or modifications
- Refuse the application if the legal criteria are not met.
If the order is granted, the defendant will be notified and given a chance to challenge it at a return hearing. This ensures the freezing injunction is fair and does not cause undue hardship.
Serving the freezing order
If granted, the freezing order must be properly served on the defendant. This ensures they are officially notified and bound by its terms.
Serving the order correctly is crucial, as a failure to do so may make it unenforceable.
- Serving the defendant: The order must be delivered to the defendant as soon as possible, typically in person or via their legal representatives.
- Notifying third parties: Banks, financial institutions, and other relevant parties holding the defendant’s assets must also be informed so they can comply with the terms of the order.
Freezing order compliance
While freezing orders legally restrict defendants from dealing with certain assets, attempts to evade or violate injunctions do still occur.
If there is evidence a defendant has breached a freezing order, the claimant can apply to the court for further restrictions or sanctions, contempt of court proceedings, and/or third-party disclosure orders, forcing banks or other entities to reveal hidden assets.
Ensuring compliance is not a passive process – it requires vigilance, legal strategy, and swift action to protect the claimant’s financial interests.
Limitations with freezing injunctions
Although freezing injunctions provide essential protection for claimants, they do have notable drawbacks and limitations. These include:
High evidential burden
Courts require compelling evidence to justify granting a freezing injunction. The claimant must prove they have a strong and legitimate legal claim and there is a real risk the defendant may dispose of assets to evade a judgment. Evidence may include witness statements and forensic financial analysis to prove assets are at risk.
The courts do not grant freezing injunctions lightly, and the burden of proof on claimants is substantial. If the evidence is insufficient, the court will likely refuse the application.
Costly to obtain and enforce
Applying for a freezing order can be an expensive legal process. Costs may include:
- Solicitor and barrister fees
- Court fees for filing the application
- Costs related to obtaining and presenting necessary evidence
- Potential costs if the order is later discharged and the claimant is required to compensate the defendant.
Furthermore, enforcing a freezing order can incur additional costs, particularly if the defendant challenges it or if international enforcement mechanisms are needed.
Claimants should weigh the costs of applying for a freezing order against the overall financial impact of securing or failing to secure the assets. Specialist legal advice from injunction solicitors can help claimants determine whether alternative measures, such as settlement negotiations or other interim remedies, may be more appropriate.
Risk of oppressive application
A freezing injunction must be carefully tailored to avoid being overly broad or punitive. If an order is too extensive – freezing assets beyond what is necessary – it can be challenged by the defendant on the grounds of being oppressive.
Courts strive to strike a balance between protecting claimants’ interests and ensuring the defendant is not unfairly restricted.
Enforcement challenges
Courts in other countries are not automatically bound by UK court orders, meaning enforcement often depends on bilateral treaties, international conventions, or local legal provisions.
In some cases, defendants may attempt to resist enforcement by arguing lack of jurisdiction, procedural unfairness, or inconsistencies with local law. These factors can delay or even prevent successful enforcement, and additional legal steps may be required.
Overcoming challenges with expert legal support
- Building a strong evidential case: Ensuring all necessary financial and legal documentation to support the application.
- Structuring the injunction effectively: Crafting a proportionate and defensible order to reduce the risk of challenge.
- Navigating international enforcement: Working with foreign counsel to secure recognition and enforcement of the order abroad.
- Defending against legal challenges: Responding to arguments that the order is oppressive, unnecessary, or improperly granted.
Defending against freezing orders
Being subject to a freezing order can have significant reputational and financial consequences for a defendant. Once notified, banks, business partners, and other financial institutions may perceive the order as a red flag, associating it with financial instability or potential misconduct – even if the allegations are later proven unfounded.
Additionally, while courts typically allow reasonable living expenses and legal fees, a freezing order can still place severe financial strain on individuals and businesses. For business owners, restricted access to funds may disrupt operations, affect payroll, and damage investor confidence, leading to long-term financial harm.
If a defendant is subject to a freezing order, they have several legal options to challenge it, including:
- Lack of evidence: Arguing that the claimant has failed to provide sufficient evidence of a risk of asset dissipation.
- Unfair prejudice: Demonstrating the order unfairly restricts legitimate business activities or personal expenses.
- Failure to disclose material facts: Arguing the claimant failed to disclose crucial information when applying for the order.
- Alternative security: Proposing alternative safeguards, such as security payments or third-party guarantees, as an alternative to a full freezing order.
Often, the first opportunity to challenge a freezing order comes at the return hearing. Having expert legal representation is essential to:
- Examine and challenge the claimant’s evidence – exposing any weaknesses in the application.
- Argue for modifications or discharge if the freezing order is overly broad or lacks justification.
- Negotiate adjustments to the order, ensuring you have access to sufficient funds for living costs, expenses, and business operations.
- Propose alternative safeguards to persuade the court to lift or limit the freezing order.
Grounds for discharging a freezing order
A freezing order is not permanent, and – even if granted – it may be discharged early if the defendant successfully challenges its validity or necessity. Common grounds for discharging a freezing injunction include:
The claimant fails to pursue their claim in a timely manner
A freezing order is intended to protect assets while legal proceedings are ongoing. If the claimant does not actively pursue their case and there are unreasonable delays, the court may decide the freezing order is unjustified and discharge it. This ensures defendants are not indefinitely restricted from accessing their assets.
New evidence shows the risk of asset dissipation no longer exists
When a freezing order is granted, it is based on the risk the defendant may move or hide assets. If new evidence eliminates this concern – for example, if the defendant provides security or guarantees the assets will remain available – the court may reconsider and discharge the order.
The claimant misled the court or failed to provide full disclosure
Freezing orders are often granted on an ex parte (without notice) basis, meaning the defendant is not present to argue against the application. Because of this, the claimant must present all relevant information, including facts that may weaken their case.
If the claimant withheld crucial details or misrepresented information, the defendant can apply to have the order discharged. Courts take non-disclosure seriously, and failure to provide full and honest information can result in the order being lifted and penalties against the claimant.
The freezing order is deemed oppressive or excessive
A freezing order must be carefully tailored to prevent unjust hardship on the defendant. If the order is too broad – restricting more assets than necessary or preventing normal business operations – the court may modify or discharge it.
Additionally, if the order is causing unnecessary harm to third parties, such as business associates or family members not directly involved in the dispute, the court may discharge or amend it to strike a fair balance.
How to apply for a freezing order discharge
Since freezing injunctions are granted by the court based on evidence provided by the claimant, the defendant must convince the court the order is no longer justified or was wrongly granted.
To do this, the defendant must:
- Determine the grounds for discharge: Before filing an application, the defendant must determine the legal basis for challenging the order.
- Prepare and file an application with the court: The defendant must submit a formal application to the court requesting the discharge or modification of the freezing order. This application should include a detailed legal argument explaining why the order should be lifted and witness statements and supporting evidence to demonstrate why the order should no longer apply.
- Give the claimant the opportunity to reply: The claimant must be notified of the application and given an opportunity to respond. The claimant will likely oppose the discharge and provide counterarguments to justify why the order should remain in place.
- Attend a court hearing: Both parties will present their arguments and evidence, and the court will decide based on the merits of both arguments.
Challenging a freezing order requires detailed legal and factual analysis, and a well-prepared application. As such, strong legal representation can significantly increase the chances of success.
Consequences of breaching a freezing order
Courts treat violations of freezing injunctions with the utmost severity, as such breaches can undermine the integrity of the judicial process and hinder the enforcement of justice.
1. Contempt of court
A breach of a freezing order is considered contempt of court, which can result in severe penalties. Courts can impose fines, seize assets, or even imprison an individual for non-compliance. The severity of the punishment typically depends on the extent of the breach and whether it was intentional.
2. Adverse inference
If a defendant breaches a freezing order, this can negatively impact their credibility in the ongoing legal proceedings. Courts may infer the defendant intended to dissipate assets unlawfully, further strengthening the claimant’s case.
3. Reputational damage
Breaching a freezing order can have serious reputational consequences, particularly for businesses and high-profile individuals. Once a breach is established, financial institutions, business partners, and regulatory bodies may view the defendant as untrustworthy, leading to potential financial and professional setbacks.
4. Increased costs and financial penalties
In addition to fines imposed by the court, defendants who breach a freezing order may be required to pay the claimant’s legal costs and compensation for any financial harm caused. These costs can be substantial, especially if the breach results in further litigation.
5. Further legal consequences
Beyond immediate penalties, violations might lead to:
- Expansion of the freezing order: The court may broaden the scope of the injunction, placing even more restrictions on the defendant’s assets.
- Appointment of a receiver: In severe cases, courts may appoint a receiver to take control of the defendant’s assets to prevent further breaches.
Given the severe consequences of breaching a freezing order, defendants must comply with the terms set out by the court. If a defendant is unsure about any aspect of the order, legal advice is essential to avoid unintentional violations.
How much does it cost to obtain a freezing order?
- Legal fees: Can range from £1,000 to over £100,000, depending on case complexity.
- Court fees: The application fee for a freezing order in court is typically £100. However additional court fees will likely apply. For example, the cost of making a legal claim can amount to several thousand pounds.
- Cross-undertaking in damages: The claimant may be required to compensate the defendant for losses if the order is later found unjustified.
Freezing Injunctions - FAQs
Any individual, business, or organisation with a valid legal claim may apply for a freezing order. However, they will need to demonstrate there is a real risk the defendant may dispose of or hide their assets before a judgment can be enforced.
Typically, freezing orders are sought in cases involving fraud, breach of contract, or financial disputes.
To obtain a freezing order, the applicant must provide:
- A strong underlying claim.
- Evidence the defendant owns the relevant assets.
- Proof there is a real risk of asset dissipation.
- Justification that granting the order is fair and necessary.
- A cross-undertaking in damages to cover potential losses if the order is later found to be unjustified.
A cross-undertaking in damages is a legal commitment required from the claimant when applying for a freezing order. This safeguard ensures claimants act responsibly when seeking such serious legal measures and provides financial protection for defendants in case of wrongful restraint.
Yes, a defendant can challenge or seek to discharge a freezing order on several grounds, including:
- Lack of sufficient evidence supporting the claimant’s case.
- Proof there is no real risk of asset dissipation.
- Failure by the claimant to disclose material facts.
- The freezing order being oppressive or overly broad.
A worldwide freezing order (WFO) is an order that applies to a defendant’s assets globally, rather than just within one jurisdiction.
It is typically used in international fraud cases where assets are spread across multiple countries. Because of its broad reach, a WFO requires significant justification and evidence before a court will grant it.
To apply for a freezing order, you must:
- Prepare an application supported by witness statements and documentary evidence.
- Submit the application to the court.
- Provide a cross-undertaking in damages.
- Attend a hearing where the judge will consider the application.
- Attend a return hearing where the defendant can challenge the order.
If granted, you must also ensure the order is properly served on the defendant and relevant third parties.
A freezing injunction itself is not automatically made public, but details may become known if the case goes to court or if financial institutions and third parties are notified.
Some freezing orders may remain confidential if the court deems it necessary to prevent tipping off the defendant before the order takes effect.
Contact our injunction solicitors today
If you need assistance with obtaining, defending, or discharging a freezing order, our expert injunction solicitors are here to help. Our team offers comprehensive support, including:
- Rapid assessment: Evaluating the urgency and merit of your case to determine whether a freezing injunction is appropriate.
- Preparation of evidence: Compiling the robust evidence needed to support or challenge a freezing order application.
- Court representation: Representing you at hearings to secure or oppose freezing orders effectively.
- Enforcement and monitoring: Ensuring compliance with freezing orders and taking further action if breaches occur.
We can also help with a wide range of other injunctions, including but not limited to search orders, disclosure orders, springboard injunctions and cryptocurrency injunctions.
For more information, please call us on 020 7467 3980 or complete our online enquiry form and our injunction solicitors will be in touch to find out more about how we can help you.