The Debtor Is Moving Assets: Can I Get a DIFC Freezing Order?

A DIFC freezing order may protect assets against unjustified dissipation, but an unpaid invoice or fear of non-payment is not enough. The application needs a jurisdictional foundation and evidence addressing the claim, available assets, a real dissipation risk and whether the relief is just and convenient. Before sending a warning, preserve the evidence and obtain an urgent assessment of whether notice would defeat the proposed protection.

This article is for a creditor who has learned of a proposed transfer, sale, refinancing or unexplained movement of value while a claim remains unresolved. It is not a guide to using an injunction to force settlement. Your first useful product is a short evidence schedule.

What you know	Preserve now	What remains to be established
A property may be sold	Listing, title information and dated correspondence	Ownership, transaction status and destination of proceeds
Money moved between companies	Lawfully held records and the source of the information	Purpose, consideration and whether the debtor retains value
The debtor stopped answering	The complete correspondence chain	Whether anything connects the silence with asset dissipation

What must a DIFC freezing order application prove?

It must address more than the strength of the debt claim. A good arguable case, potentially available assets, a real risk of unjustified dissipation and the justice and convenience of the order are distinct questions. The court also needs a proper basis for exercising jurisdiction.

In Houlihan Lokey (MEA Financial Advisory) Ltd v SP International Property Developers LLC, CFI 108/2025, paragraphs 82 to 84, the court identified the freezing requirements. Its reasoned order of 19 December 2025 refused the freezing application and discharged an earlier interim injunction. The creditor's arguable contractual case did not resolve the separate dissipation issue.

Keep the evidence organised under those separate questions. Put the contract and unpaid obligation under the claim. Put ownership and location records under assets. Put the conduct said to threaten recovery under risk. Explain the practical effect of the requested order under proportionality. A long file with all four subjects mixed together can obscure the missing link.

Articles 14 and 15 of the 2025 DIFC Courts Law should be considered for the jurisdictional route. Do not assume that calling a measure urgent supplies jurisdiction or that a worldwide request follows from a Dubai connection. The legal team should identify the statutory gateway and the proposed territorial scope before drafting the relief.

Key takeaway. Evidence that the debtor owes money and evidence that assets are at risk answer different questions. Prepare both, and identify the court's jurisdiction separately.

Is a sale or refinancing enough to show assets are disappearing?

No. Investigate what the transaction does to value and why it is happening. A sale for proper value with traceable proceeds presents a different factual question from an unexplained transfer to an insider without apparent consideration.

Houlihan Lokey illustrates the distinction. In paragraphs 89 to 109, the court examined delayed correspondence, refinancing, security and concerns about property transfers. On that record, the concerns did not establish the required risk. The decision does not make refinancing immune from scrutiny. It shows why the actual evidence matters.

For each suspected transaction, write down the asset, legal owner, counterparty, consideration, proposed date and destination of the proceeds. Then identify the document supporting each answer. Use unknown where you do not know. Do not substitute a conclusion such as asset stripping for the missing facts.

Ask what evidence points the other way. The debtor may have a documented loan maturity, a lender consent condition or a genuine commercial explanation. Give those materials to your adviser too. They may change the recommended application, narrow its scope or indicate that an ordinary claim should proceed without a freezing request.

A useful evidence note also separates direct knowledge from a report received from someone else. A witness who saw instructions being issued can explain that event. A witness who heard a rumour should identify the source accurately. Preserve the original message with its date and context. Repeated retelling does not improve its quality.

Use these distinctions before describing a transaction in an affidavit.

Can I apply without warning the debtor?

Possibly, where the court is satisfied there are good reasons for proceeding without notice. Urgency and secrecy should be explained with facts, not treated as automatic features of every debt dispute.

RDC 25.8 to 25.10 and 25.20 to 25.23 address without-notice relief and the supporting evidence. A freezing application requires affidavit evidence. Explain why notice was not given and place the material facts before the court. The without-notice process demands candour precisely because the other side is absent.

Create a chronology of discovery. When did you learn about the transaction, what changed, and what is expected to happen next? A genuine transfer scheduled for completion is a different urgency case from a concern that has remained unexplained for months. If there was delay, explain it. Do not disguise an old concern as a development discovered that morning.

The draft should identify the protection required during the period before both parties can be heard. Think about service, the return hearing and the material the respondent should receive, not just obtaining an initial signature. Plan who can make decisions and provide documents quickly if the court asks for clarification.

Do not circulate accusations to customers, banks or employees as an improvised substitute for court relief. Preserve confidentiality and give the legal team the evidence needed to decide the appropriate lawful step. Nor should anyone obtain bank access, account credentials or private documents without authority. The quality of the evidence includes how it was obtained.

What will the order cover, and will it give me the money?

A freezing order is protective relief, not payment of the claim. Its precise restraints, financial limit, disclosure provisions, exceptions and geographical reach depend on the order actually made.

RDC 25.1(6) and (7) address freezing and asset-information measures. The court's published Schedule A example also shows why the wording matters: restraints sit alongside specified exceptions and mechanisms for variation. A template is a starting point for drafting, not the order in your case.

Scope must be justified. In Omanand v Ondrei, ARB 050/2025, paragraphs 61 to 63, the court limited a freezing order to DIFC and UAE assets after considering the position with both parties heard. That is a case-specific procedural outcome, not a rule that relief must always have that reach.

Ask the drafting team to test the order against an ordinary transaction. Could the debtor understand what is prohibited? Would the proposed wording unnecessarily halt a business payment unrelated to the alleged risk? Can a bank identify the relevant person and account? Precision makes protection more credible and reduces avoidable disputes about what the order requires.

Do not confuse asset disclosure with ownership adjudication. A disclosed account may reveal a lead, a disputed interest or a third-party issue requiring further work. Build the next recovery decision around the evidence obtained. A list of assets is not a receipt, and a restriction does not itself establish the amount that will eventually be collected.

What risk do I take if the injunction should not have been granted?

The applicant can take on financial exposure through the undertaking in damages, as well as the costs of the application. This risk belongs in the business decision before the order is sought.

RDC 25.25 addresses the undertaking and possible security to support it. In Houlihan Lokey, the operative order and paragraphs 75 to 81 directed an inquiry into damages following discharge of the earlier injunction. An inquiry is not a final assessment of the amount payable, but it is a real consequence of the application.

Ask for a short downside note. What commercial transaction could be interrupted? What loss might be alleged? What resources support the undertaking? Who in the creditor company has authority to accept the exposure? Those questions should not first be raised when the respondent asks for discharge.

The discipline is to request the narrowest relief that addresses the evidenced risk. If one specific movement of value is the concern, explain why a broad restriction is necessary or consider a more focused proposal. Where substitute security is offered, evaluate its terms and practical adequacy rather than rejecting it because it differs from the original request.

An honest downside assessment also records the weaknesses in the claim and the explanations the debtor is likely to give. This is not disloyalty to the creditor. It is how the decision maker understands the risk being accepted. A confident assertion that the debtor is plainly wrong does not answer a question about loss caused by an overbroad order.

Common mistake. Treating the undertaking in damages as routine wording overlooks a real financial risk. Consider the loss a proposed restraint could cause before asking the court to impose it.

Before authorising the application, confirm that these matters have an owner.

What should I do today if a transfer may be imminent?

Preserve the evidence, identify the imminent event and obtain a focused legal assessment before taking a step that may alert the debtor or distort the record. The following sequence is an internal preparation checklist, not permission to interfere with the debtor's property.

1. Save the original document or communication showing the proposed transaction. Record when and how it was obtained.
2. Confirm the debtor's legal identity and the basis for saying it owns or controls the asset.
3. Write a dated chronology of the claim and the suspected movement of value. Distinguish facts, inference and hearsay.
4. Collect the debtor's explanations and relevant adverse documents. Give the legal team a balanced record.
5. Ask for advice on jurisdiction, notice, the proposed scope and the undertaking in damages.
6. Prepare the affidavit, exhibits and draft relief in the form required for the application.
7. Plan compliance with directions, service and the next hearing if an order is made.

The evidentiary question that often matters is specific: what will exist tomorrow that does not exist today, or what will be lost if the court does not act? A document-backed answer can guide an urgent application. An answer consisting only of the debtor's reputation or the creditor's anxiety needs further examination.

Keep one person responsible for updates. If completion is postponed, the property owner changes or the debtor provides a credible explanation, tell the legal team immediately. An application assembled yesterday must not be presented today on facts that have materially changed.

What if my evidence is not yet enough for a freezing order?

Continue the recovery assessment without pretending the missing evidence exists. Depending on the file, the next sensible task may be a targeted factual check, a request for documents through a proper process, negotiation over security or progression of the substantive claim.

Ask for a written gap list. It should identify the precise fact that needs proof and why it matters. A request to find more about the debtor is too broad. A request to establish who owns a specified asset, whether completion has occurred and where the proceeds went is capable of being answered.

Keep the disputed payment claim separate from allegations of fraud or concealment. Use language supported by the record. If the evidence only shows non-payment, say that. If new material later shows a transaction inconsistent with the earlier explanation, preserve both versions and let the legal team assess the inference.

The decisions discussed here are reasoned interim orders, not final determinations of every issue in those commercial disputes. Sources were checked on 28 September 2026. Later orders and the current position in the particular proceedings should be rechecked before use. The objective is a defensible protective step, not an impressive-looking order obtained on assumptions that cannot survive the return hearing.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I freeze assets just because an invoice is overdue? Non-payment alone does not establish the separate requirements for a freezing order. The evidence must address jurisdiction, the claim, assets, dissipation risk and the appropriateness of relief.

Does refinancing prove that the debtor is hiding money? No. Examine the transaction, consideration and use of proceeds. Houlihan Lokey shows why a legitimate commercial explanation and the actual evidence matter.

Can I apply before starting the main claim? RDC 25.6 and 25.7 contemplate interim relief before proceedings in the circumstances specified there. The court may require the claim to be commenced, and jurisdiction still needs to be established.

Must I tell the debtor before applying? A without-notice application needs justification. The evidence should explain why notice was not given, and the legal team should assess whether secrecy is genuinely necessary.

Will an order stop every business payment? Read its scope and exceptions. The court's example contains provisions that may permit certain ordinary activity, but the actual order may differ.

Does a freezing order mean I own the frozen money? No. Protective relief is not the same as payment or a determination that every disclosed asset belongs to the creditor.

Can I be liable if the order causes loss? An undertaking in damages can create financial exposure. Obtain advice on its terms, possible security and the consequences of the proposed restraint before applying.

Should I use a private investigator to access bank accounts? Do not obtain account access or private records without authority. Discuss lawful evidence-gathering methods and any appropriate court process with the legal team.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice on your specific situation.

Related Guides

Our judgments, awards and enforcement page treats recognition and enforcement as separate stages, and covers freezing orders and asset disclosure.

• My DIFC Freezing Order Stops Me Paying Rent and Legal Fees
• You Won a DIFC Judgment but Cannot Find the Debtor's Assets
• I Won an Arbitral Award but the Debtor Will Not Pay in Dubai