Freezing Orders & Interim Relief in the DIFC Courts

The DIFC Courts can grant the full range of urgent protective measures – freezing injunctions (including, in appropriate cases, worldwide freezing orders), search orders, disclosure and asset-disclosure orders, and other interim relief – under the DIFC Courts Law (DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025) and the Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC), and in support of arbitration under the DIFC Arbitration Law. Orders can be sought without notice where notice would defeat their purpose, in return for strict duties of candour on the applicant. Since the Carmon line of authority, now reflected in the DIFC Courts Law No. 2 of 2025, the Courts can also grant interim relief in support of proceedings seated elsewhere.

Freezing orders & interim relief at a glance

• Legal basis: DIFC Courts Law (Law No. 2 of 2025); Rules of the DIFC Courts (RDC); DIFC Arbitration Law for arbitration support
• The test (freezing): Good arguable case; real risk of dissipation; just and convenient to grant
• Without notice: Available where notice would defeat the order; duty of full and frank disclosure; cross-undertaking in damages
• Reach: DIFC assets and, in appropriate cases, worldwide
• In aid of: DIFC claims; DIFC-seated arbitration; and proceedings elsewhere (Carmon / 2025 Courts Law)

1. What interim relief the DIFC Courts can grant

The DIFC Courts, as a common-law court exercising equitable jurisdiction, can grant freezing injunctions (restraining the disposal of assets), search orders (to preserve evidence), disclosure and asset-disclosure orders, prohibitory and mandatory injunctions, and security for costs. The power derives from the DIFC Courts Law (DIFC Law No. 2 of 2025) and the RDC, and is exercised on principles familiar from the wider common-law world – which is one reason cross-border parties are comfortable seeking urgent relief here.

2. The test for a freezing order

To obtain a freezing injunction, an applicant generally must show a good arguable case on the merits, a real risk that assets will be dissipated or moved beyond reach (concrete evidence, not mere suspicion), and that it is just and convenient to grant the order. A freezing order restrains dealing with assets up to a stated value and usually carves out ordinary living and business expenses and legal costs. Crucially, it is not security and gives the applicant no priority over other creditors – it preserves the position, it does not improve it. A freeze of this kind is typically sought to preserve assets ahead of enforcing a judgment or award.

3. Without-notice applications and the applicant’s duties

Where giving notice would allow assets to be moved first, the application can be made without notice (ex parte). In return, the applicant owes a heavy duty of full and frank disclosure – including of the points the respondent would make if present – and ordinarily gives a cross-undertaking in damages to compensate the respondent (and affected third parties) if the order later proves unjustified. The order is granted until a return date, when the respondent can appear and argue for it to be discharged or varied. A material failure to disclose can itself be grounds to discharge the order, regardless of the merits.

4. Search and disclosure orders

Alongside freezing relief, the Courts can grant search orders to preserve documents or evidence at risk of destruction, and disclosure orders requiring a respondent to reveal the nature, value and location of assets – including, where appropriate, assets abroad. Asset-disclosure relief frequently accompanies a freezing order, because a freeze is only as effective as the applicant’s knowledge of where the assets are.

5. Worldwide freezing orders and assets abroad

In appropriate cases the DIFC Courts can grant a worldwide freezing order reaching assets outside the DIFC, typically subject to the usual safeguards protecting third parties and foreign assets and to undertakings about how the order will be used abroad. Whether a worldwide order is justified depends on the evidence of assets and of dissipation risk, and on the Court’s jurisdiction over the underlying claim. Enforcing the order against foreign assets is then a separate, jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction exercise.

6. Interim relief in support of arbitration and foreign proceedings

The DIFC Courts can grant interim measures in support of a DIFC-seated arbitration, and a tribunal can order interim measures of its own. The position on relief in aid of proceedings seated or pending elsewhere was shaped by the Carmon line of authority, and the DIFC Courts Law No. 2 of 2025 now reflects that jurisdiction – so the DIFC can, in the right case, act as a source of interim relief even where the substantive dispute sits in another forum. The detail still turns on jurisdiction and the facts, so it should be assessed case by case. The arbitration framework is set out on DIFC-seated arbitration and DIAC.

Note: Whether the DIFC Courts will grant a freezing order in aid of proceedings elsewhere turns on jurisdiction and the specific facts; while Carmon and the 2025 Courts Law support the power, it is assessed on the evidence before any application.

7. Policing the order: third parties, penal notice and contempt

A freezing order binds the respondent and, once notified, affects third parties such as banks who must not knowingly assist a breach. The order carries a penal notice, and breach can be punished as contempt of court. A respondent who considers the order wrongly obtained can apply to vary or discharge it – including on the basis of non-disclosure – and may seek to enforce the applicant’s cross-undertaking if the order causes loss.

8. Speed and evidence

Freezing and search applications are won or lost on preparation: clear evidence of the cause of action, concrete evidence of a dissipation risk, a precise schedule of assets, and scrupulous disclosure. We prepare these applications to be made at speed – often within hours – without sacrificing the candour the Court requires, because an order obtained carelessly is an order that can be discharged.

9. The DIFC injunctions practice

ATB Legal brings and resists urgent applications in the DIFC Courts – freezing injunctions, worldwide freezing orders, search and disclosure orders, and interim relief in support of arbitration – and acts to discharge or vary orders wrongly obtained.

Frequently asked questions