Mareva Injunction

A Mareva injunction, now more formally called a freezing order in England and Wales, is an interim remedy that restrains a defendant from dealing with or dissipating their assets pending the outcome of litigation. Its purpose is preventive: to stop a defendant from making themselves judgment-proof by hiding, transferring, or spending assets before the claimant can enforce a successful claim.

The remedy takes its name from Mareva Compania Naviera SA v International Bulkcarriers SA (1975), a decision of the English Court of Appeal in which Lord Denning granted an injunction freezing a shipowner's London bank account. The jurisdiction was later placed on a statutory footing in England by section 37 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, and under the Civil Procedure Rules (Part 25) it is now styled a "freezing injunction."

To obtain one, an applicant typically must show:

• a good arguable case on the substantive claim;
• assets within the jurisdiction (or, for a worldwide freezing order, abroad);
• a real risk of dissipation of those assets; and
• that granting the order is just and convenient.

Applications are usually made ex parte (without notice), imposing on the applicant a strict duty of full and frank disclosure. The order does not give the claimant any proprietary interest in the frozen assets — it operates in personam against the defendant, with breach punishable as contempt of court. Standard carve-outs permit reasonable living expenses and legal costs.

The remedy has spread across common-law jurisdictions, including Australia, Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong, and the British Overseas Territories, and is frequently deployed in cross-border fraud, asset-tracing, and international commercial disputes. Worldwide freezing orders, recognized since Babanaft v Bassatne (1989), extend the reach beyond the forum state, though enforcement abroad depends on local recognition.