News & Insights

When a relationship ends, disputes over financial settlements can sometimes lead to unacceptable behavior. Typically, the spouse with more economic power might try to hide or devalue assets by accumulating debts, wasting money on gambling or luxury trips, or giving away valuable items like art or antiques.

If you’re concerned that your ex-spouse is trying to diminish your rightful share of assets, there are legal measures you can take. While it’s not easy to obtain, a freezing injunction can protect marital assets by preventing your spouse from selling or transferring them.

It’s crucial to act swiftly if you notice suspicious activities like large cash withdrawals, property transfers for little or no value, or share transfers in a company. These actions could significantly affect your financial settlement, so staying vigilant and informed is key.

What assets does an injunction cover?

A freezing injunction can apply to all types of assets such as bank accounts, property, land, business shares, antiques and pensions.  On occasion it can also apply to other jurisdictions, not just assets held in England and Wales.  It is a draconian measure, but it will typically allow an amount of money for your former spouse to live off and ensure they can meet their normal day-to-day expenses, and payment of their legal expenses but it will not allow for extravagant spending, or transferring of assets to other parties.

How do I obtain an injunction?

If you suspect foul play, then the most important thing is to act quickly. Your solicitor will need as much detailed information as you can provide about the assets that are at risk and why you believe they are at risk.  This information should ideally include the whereabouts of the assets, the value of the assets, why you believe they may be transferred, and any evidence you hold to confirm this such as witnesses, emails or text messages.  If the asset consists of money held in an account the name of the institution whether a bank or a building society should be given together with the address of any branch associated with that account and ideally the account number. Once in receipt of this information we can advise you on your options and the prospect of obtaining a freezing injunction.

This type of court order is usually applied for without putting your former partner on notice, so they cannot remove or reduce the value of the asset before the initial hearing.  If the injunction is granted, it will only be for a short period of time initially, until your former partner has the opportunity of coming back to court and having their say and explaining their position as to why an injunction may not be granted or the extent to which they are prepared to allow any order to be made.  The court can then weigh up both sides arguments before deciding if the injunction should be extended.

To succeed in obtaining an injunction in these situations, you must satisfy a number of criteria including providing evidence going beyond mere suspicion that there is a real risk the asset will be transferred or removed to your detriment by your former partner so that to allow the transaction to proceed would be to your detriment in the later course of division of the marital assets.  This is why as much evidence as you can provide both as to the likelihood of the transaction that you seek to prevent of taking place and the effect upon your application for financial relief were it to be permitted is important.  If the court is satisfied that there is a risk of the dissipation of assets, the judge will move on to consider the ‘balance of convenience’ test.  This means the court will weigh up all the facts and decide if the likely damage that would be suffered by you if the injunction was not granted is greater than the potential damage to your former partner if it was to be granted.

The court has a wide discretion when it comes to freezing injunctions and both your conduct and that of your former partner can be taken into account.

Undertaking as to damages

It is important to note that as an applicant you will be expected to provide an undertaking, which is a formal promise to the court that should it later be discovered that the injunction should not have been granted, then you will pay any damages to your former partner that they have suffered as a consequence of your application having been granted in their absence.  This is used by the court in an effort to prevent malicious applications.

Advantages and disadvantages

The main advantage of a freezing injunction is that it will preserve the asset or assets you believe are at risk of disappearing.  Prevention is much better and reliable than attempting recovery after the asset is gone.

Applying for a freezing injunction can also bring a financial dispute to a head and more often than not it encourages early settlement without the need for a final hearing.  This can save costs in the long run.

However, if you apply for an injunction inappropriately, it could be costly for you in terms of having to pay damages to your former spouse.

Not all transfers of assets are aimed at devaluing your former partner’s estate.  For example, your former partner may legitimately transfer assets by selling a property or business at market value.  These transfers may be getting rid of one asset but they will usually mean an increase in another asset, typically cash in the bank.  An injunction would not be appropriate in these circumstances as no detriment would be shown to have been caused by the proposed transfer.

How we can help

Applying for an injunction is not a step that is to be taken lightly, as an order for costs can and frequently is made against an unsuccessful applicant and it is important therefore that you seek early legal advice as delay alone could be a reason for your application failing.  Obtaining early expert advice is important in order that assets can be preserved, and to ensure you obtain a fair settlement based upon the value of all the available assets.

Contact us

For further advice please contact one of our Family Law experts.

This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. Please note that the law may have changed since this article was published.