A Mareva injunction is a court order that freezes your spouse’s assets during divorce proceedings, so they cannot be transferred, dissipated, hidden or sold before the court divides them. In Singapore, the family court can grant this relief in matrimonial proceedings — including worldwide orders covering assets held abroad — when there is a genuine risk that assets will be removed from the court’s reach.

Salem Ibrahim LLC is rated five stars for Family Law in The Straits Times/Statista Singapore’s Best Law Firms 2027 survey, on more than 12,000 recommendations from almost 6,000 lawyers.

Why Freeze Assets in a Divorce?

A divorce settlement is only as good as the assets behind it. If a spouse sells the family company shares, moves funds offshore, places properties in relatives’ names, or empties bank accounts while proceedings are ongoing, a judgment in your favour can become worthless. The Mareva injunction exists to prevent exactly that: it preserves the status quo so there is something to divide when the court finally rules.

The remedy takes its name from Mareva Compania Naviera SA v International Bulkcarriers SA, a case in which the English courts first recognised that a creditor could freeze a defendant’s assets pending trial. Singapore courts adopted the principle, and it now applies in matrimonial proceedings where one spouse seeks to protect assets from dissipation by the other.

What a Mareva Injunction Does

A Mareva injunction (also called a freezing order) restrains the other spouse from:

  • Disposing of, transferring or charging assets
  • Moving funds out of Singapore
  • Reducing asset values below what is needed to satisfy the expected award
  • Dealing with assets held through nominees, companies or trusts
  • Selling the matrimonial home during divorce
  • Closing bank accounts or draining cash deposits
  • Transferring company shares to family members secretly

Orders are typically expressed to allow the respondent a reasonable allowance for living expenses and legal fees — the freeze targets dissipation, not ordinary spending.

Worldwide Freezing Orders

Where assets are held in multiple jurisdictions, the court can grant a worldwide Mareva injunction, freezing assets wherever they are located, with an exception for assets in jurisdictions whose courts will not enforce such an order. Our firm acted for the celebrity Jamie Chua in a hotly contested matrimonial case involving a $92 million worldwide Mareva injunction — one of the reported outcomes from our matrimonial practice.

When Will the Court Grant One?

To succeed, you generally need to show:

  1. A good arguable case on your claim to the matrimonial assets
  2. A real risk of dissipation — solid evidence that assets may be moved, hidden or depleted, not mere suspicion
  3. Justice favours granting the order — the balance of convenience

Risk of dissipation is the battleground in most applications. Evidence that convinces the court includes:

  • Secret transfers shortly after separation
  • Unexplained movement of funds offshore
  • Sudden restructuring of companies
  • Placing assets under relatives’ names
  • Attempts to sell major assets without consent
  • Closing accounts or changing banking relationships unexpectedly

Urgent Applications — Without Notice to Your Spouse

Because tipping off a spouse invites precisely the dissipation the order is meant to prevent, Mareva applications are frequently made without notice (ex parte) — the respondent learns of the order only once it is in force. This is critical when you suspect imminent asset movement.

However, the applicant owes the court a duty of full and frank disclosure: you must tell the court everything relevant, including facts that weaken your case. Failure to disclose material facts can lead to the order being discharged.

Breach and Enforcement

Disobeying a Mareva injunction is contempt of court, which can result in imprisonment. The court also has powers to set aside dispositions intended to defeat claims — transactions made to reduce the pool of matrimonial assets can be reversed under the Women’s Charter.

Finding Hidden Assets: Tracing and Discovery

A freezing order works alongside asset tracing and discovery — locating assets held through trusts, family companies, nominee arrangements and cross-border structures. Disclosure orders compel the other party to swear affidavits detailing their assets; forensic accounting and third-party records fill in the gaps. An asset map assembled early shapes both the injunction application and the eventual division.

What This Costs and How Long It Takes

Urgent without-notice applications can be filed within days where the risk of dissipation is immediate. Costs vary enormously with the complexity of the asset structures involved. Early legal advice preserves options; by the time assets have vanished, remedies narrow considerably.

FAQ

Yes, unfortunately spouses sometimes attempt to hide or transfer assets during divorce proceedings. This can include moving funds offshore, placing assets in relatives’ names, selling property secretly, or transferring shares. The Mareva injunction exists to prevent this.

Yes. A Mareva injunction can freeze bank accounts and other liquid assets when there is evidence the spouse may dissipate funds. This is one of the most common uses of the freezing order.

You can apply for a worldwide freezing order. Provide evidence of offshore transfers or attempts to move funds abroad. The court acts quickly when there is a real risk of dissipation.

Document suspicious transactions, bank statements showing unusual withdrawals, company filings indicating asset transfers, or communications suggesting concealment. A lawyer can help obtain formal disclosure orders to compel full financial transparency.

Yes. In fact, separation is often when asset dissipation begins, so applying soon after separation can be critical to preserving the asset pool.

Usually no. Applications are commonly made without notice, so the respondent learns of the order only after it takes effect. This prevents them from acting before the freeze is in place.

Breach is contempt of court and can result in imprisonment. Transactions made to defeat claims can also be set aside so the assets remain available for division.

Tracing and discovery can follow the funds — through company records, bank evidence and disclosure orders. The sooner this begins, the more recoverable the trail remains. You may still have recourse against recipients in some circumstances.

No. Orders typically carve out a reasonable allowance for living expenses and legal fees. The freeze targets disposal and dissipation, not ordinary day-to-day spending.

Yes — they are the same remedy. “Mareva injunction” is the traditional name (from the leading case), while “freezing order” is the more modern term used by many practitioners today.

Facing a divorce where your spouse may be hiding or moving assets? Time is of the essence. Speak to our matrimonial team — call (65) 6226 1233 or request a callback.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *