Legal 500 Leading Firm 2026 / The Time Best Law Firms 2026 / 40+ Years of Expert Legal Practice in London
Legal 500 Leading Firm 2026 / The Time Best Law Firms 2026 / 40+ Years of Expert Legal Practice in London
Urgent disputes can require court action before a case reaches trial. Lewis Nedas Law advises individuals and businesses seeking or responding to interim injunctions, freezing injunctions, search orders and imaging orders.
Speak to our injunctive relief solicitors in London on +44 20 7387 2032 or complete our online contact form if assets, evidence, confidential information or business interests are at immediate risk.
Our dispute resolution team acts in complex domestic and cross-border claims. We can assess whether urgent relief may be available, prepare or respond to applications and advise on the risks created by an injunction.
Call +44 20 7387 2032 Request a ConsultationAn injunction is a court order requiring a person to do something or refrain from specified conduct.
Injunctions may be sought during a claim, before proceedings have started in an urgent case, or in certain circumstances after judgment.
Interim injunctions are temporary orders designed to protect the position before the underlying dispute is finally determined. A final injunction may form part of the remedy awarded after trial.
Civil injunctions can arise in commercial, fraud, company, property and other disputes. Examples include orders designed to restrain misuse of confidential information, prevent specified conduct or protect assets from dissipation.
Different injunctions have different legal tests. The evidence, urgency, underlying cause of action and effect of the proposed order all need careful assessment.
The Civil Procedure Rules give the courts a range of powers to grant interim remedies.
For many interim prohibitory injunctions, the court considers whether there is a serious issue to be tried, whether damages would provide an adequate remedy and where the balance of convenience lies.
Other types of injunction have their own requirements. Freezing injunctions and search orders are subject to demanding tests reflecting their intrusive nature.
An applicant normally needs evidence supporting the application. Where relief is sought before proceedings have started, the court can grant it where the matter is urgent or where doing so is desirable in the interests of justice.
An injunction application will commonly be made on notice so that the respondent has an opportunity to attend the hearing and present their case.
Some urgent applications can be made without advance notice.
The court must be satisfied that there are good reasons for proceeding without notice. This may arise where warning the respondent could defeat the purpose of the application, such as a credible risk that assets or evidence will disappear.
An applicant making a without notice application has demanding duties to the court. The evidence and presentation must fairly address material matters, including points that may assist the absent respondent.
A further hearing is commonly arranged so the respondent can challenge the order, seek changes to it or ask for it to be discharged.
A freezing injunction restrains a respondent from dealing with assets in a way prohibited by the order.
It is intended to protect the court process where there is a real risk that assets will be unjustifiably dissipated and a future judgment could be frustrated.
A freezing injunction does not give the applicant ownership of the respondent's assets and should not be treated simply as security for a disputed debt.
The court will usually consider whether:
The applicant has a good arguable case on the merits
There is a real risk, assessed objectively, of unjustified dissipation of assets that could leave a future judgment unsatisfied
Granting the order would be just and convenient
The evidence supporting a freezing injunction must be provided by affidavit or affirmation under the current Civil Procedure Rules.
The scope depends on the wording of the order and circumstances of the case.
A freezing injunction can restrain the removal of assets from the jurisdiction or dealings with assets located within or outside the jurisdiction.
Relevant assets may include money held in bank accounts, investments, shares, property and other valuable assets.
Worldwide freezing injunctions can arise in substantial international disputes. Cross-border cases require careful consideration of jurisdiction, overseas assets, enforcement and the effect of the English order in other countries.
Our jurisdiction and cross-border dispute solicitors can advise where assets or parties are located overseas.
A freezing injunction can be accompanied by provisions requiring information about assets and their location.
Asset disclosure can assist with policing compliance with the order and identifying property falling within its terms.
The precise disclosure required will depend on the court order. Respondents should obtain legal advice before taking steps that could conflict with its wording.
Where the underlying dispute involves allegations of fraud or misappropriated property, our civil asset recovery solicitors can advise on connected recovery claims.
A civil freezing injunction under the Civil Procedure Rules should not be confused with an account freezing order used under proceeds of crime legislation.
Civil freezing injunctions usually arise as interim remedies connected with civil proceedings.
Account freezing orders operate under a separate statutory regime and concern suspected recoverable property held in bank or building society accounts.
The legal tests, procedures and powers involved are different.
A search order is one of the court's most intrusive civil remedies.
It can require a respondent to permit specified people to enter premises for the purpose of preserving evidence or property relevant to litigation.
Search orders are sometimes referred to as "search and seizure orders" or by the older term Anton Piller orders, although the current Civil Procedure Rules use the term "search order".
A search order is not a search warrant. It does not give a claimant, solicitor or other representative a general right to force entry or conduct an unrestricted search.
The courts reserve search orders for exceptional cases. The established requirements include an extremely strong prima facie case, very serious actual or potential damage, clear evidence that relevant material is in the respondent's possession and a real possibility that the material may be destroyed before an application on notice can be heard. The scope of the proposed order must remain proportionate to its legitimate purpose.
The rules governing interim remedies were substantially reorganised on 6 April 2025.
Current CPR Part 25 now contains a dedicated section covering search and imaging orders.
An imaging order can permit an independent IT expert to access electronic storage devices or online accounts for the purpose of copying their contents. It can provide a less intrusive method of preserving electronic evidence in an appropriate case.
Applications for search or imaging orders must be supported by affidavit or affirmation. The evidence must address matters including the premises concerned and the probability that relevant material could disappear if the order is not made.
Search orders contain safeguards designed to protect the respondent.
The current Civil Procedure Rules define a Supervising Solicitor as a solicitor experienced in the operation of search orders who is independent from the applicant's firm.
The Supervising Solicitor has a central role in the execution of the order. Under the current rules, a search or imaging order must normally be personally served by the Supervising Solicitor.
These safeguards reflect the exceptional and intrusive character of the remedy.
Obtaining an injunction can expose an applicant to financial risk.
An interim injunction will commonly contain an undertaking by the applicant to the court to pay damages that the respondent sustains if the court later considers that compensation should be paid. This is often described as a cross-undertaking in damages.
An applicant should assess that potential exposure before seeking urgent relief. The court may require further undertakings depending on the order and circumstances.
Court orders need immediate attention. Read the terms carefully and obtain legal advice as soon as possible. The order should identify what conduct is prohibited or required and may contain deadlines for disclosure or other steps.
A person affected by an injunction may be able to apply to vary or discharge it. A respondent to a without notice order will commonly have an opportunity to contest its continuation at a further hearing.
Disobeying an injunction can amount to contempt of court. The court's powers in contempt proceedings include imprisonment, a fine or confiscation of assets.
Relevant documents, electronic data and other evidence should be preserved.
Lewis Nedas Law's Dispute Resolution and Company/Commercial department is headed by Wilson (Will) Soares, Senior Associate Solicitor and Notary Public. The team also includes Eve Donohoe, Solicitor, whose experience includes urgent interim applications and civil fraud matters.
Will advises companies, entrepreneurs, high-net-worth individuals and families on contentious and commercial matters. His litigation practice covers contract, company, property and estate disputes, including domestic and cross-border cases.
Eve's experience includes urgent interim applications, civil fraud and civil recovery matters, applications for worldwide freezing orders, asset tracing and asset restraint in business disputes.
Urgent applications can require rapid assessment of evidence, remedies and procedural obligations. The wider Lewis Nedas Law team can assist where injunctive relief intersects with fraud and asset recovery, company law, insolvency, property or international disputes.
An interim injunction is a temporary court order requiring or preventing specified conduct before the underlying dispute is finally determined.
A freezing injunction restricts dealings with assets where there is a real risk of unjustified dissipation that could frustrate a future judgment.
Yes, in some cases. The court must be satisfied there are good reasons for proceeding without notice, and demanding disclosure duties apply to the applicant.
The expressions are sometimes used interchangeably, but the current Civil Procedure Rules use the term "search order". A civil search order is not a criminal search warrant and does not authorise unrestricted or forcible entry.
No. A civil search order is not a search warrant. It requires the respondent to permit access in accordance with the terms of the court order.
Yes. Depending on the circumstances, you may apply to vary or discharge an injunction and contest its continuation at a further hearing.
Applications for freezing injunctions, search orders and other urgent remedies can have immediate legal and financial consequences. Early advice can help establish whether an application is justified or how an existing order should be challenged.
Contact Lewis Nedas Law's injunctive relief solicitors in London on +44 20 7387 2032 or complete the firm's online contact form. We advise applicants and respondents on interim injunctions, freezing injunctions, search and imaging orders and related commercial litigation.
Call +44 20 7387 2032 Request a ConsultationThis page provides general information about injunctive relief, freezing injunctions and search orders in England and Wales. It does not constitute legal advice. The availability of any remedy will depend on the facts, evidence and applicable law in each case.
