Order 29, Rules of Court 2012
Mareva Injunctions and Freezing Orders in Malaysia
If you believe a company or individual you are about to sue is moving money or assets out of reach, waiting for a normal trial date can mean winning a judgment that is worthless. A Mareva injunction freezes their assets first. This is one of the most urgent applications in civil litigation, and it usually has to be filed within days.
What is a Mareva injunction
Definition
A Mareva injunction, also known as a freezing order, restrains a defendant from removing assets from the jurisdiction, or otherwise dealing with assets that may be needed to satisfy a judgment. It is procedural, not a judgment on the merits of the underlying claim; its only purpose is to stop the defendant defeating a future judgment by disposing of assets first. The application is made under Order 29 of the Rules of Court 2012, usually ex parte given the urgency involved, supported by an affidavit.
If granted ex parte, the order lasts 21 days and cannot be extended by the court. The court must fix an inter partes hearing, where the defendant can be heard, within 14 days of the order. The order must be served on the defendant within 7 days.
What is an Anton Piller order
An Anton Piller order, now also called a search order, allows the plaintiff's supervising solicitor to enter the defendant's premises and search for, and preserve, specified documents or material that might otherwise be destroyed before trial. Malaysian courts have recognised and granted this relief on the same inherent jurisdiction basis established by the English case of Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Ltd, and the application is typically made ex parte under Order 29 given the urgency involved. Because of how intrusive this order is, courts apply a strict test before granting it.
What you must show
| Mareva Injunction | Anton Piller Order | |
|---|---|---|
| Strength of case | A good arguable case | An extremely strong prima facie case |
| Risk shown | Real risk assets will be dissipated or moved | Real or potential damage of a very serious nature |
| Evidence | Assets exist and are at risk | Clear evidence the material exists and is in the defendant's possession |
| Disclosure duty | Full and frank disclosure of all material facts | Full and frank disclosure of all material facts |
| Applicant's undertaking | Undertaking in damages to the defendant | Undertaking in damages; independent supervising solicitor usually required |
Step-by-step process
Urgent instruction
We assess whether the risk of dissipation or destruction is real and immediate enough to justify an ex parte application.
Affidavit prepared
Evidence of the underlying claim, the assets or evidence at risk, and full and frank disclosure of all material facts, including anything unfavourable to your case.
Ex parte hearing
The application is heard without notifying the other side, given the urgency, usually within days of instruction.
Order served
The order must be served on the defendant, typically within 7 days for a Mareva injunction.
Inter partes hearing
Within 14 days, the defendant is heard and the court decides whether the order continues, is varied, or is discharged.
Common mistakes
Waiting to gather more evidence first
Every day of delay is a day assets or evidence can be moved. These applications are built to be filed fast on the evidence available, not perfected over weeks.
Incomplete disclosure to the court
Both orders demand full and frank disclosure, including facts that hurt your case. Courts have discharged orders, sometimes with costs consequences, where material facts were omitted.
Freezing more than necessary
A Mareva injunction should be limited to what is needed to secure the claim, not used to cripple the defendant's ordinary business or living expenses.
Frequently asked questions
What is a Mareva injunction?
A Mareva injunction, also called a freezing order, is a court order restraining a defendant from removing or dealing with their assets before judgment, so that a successful claim can actually be enforced. It is applied for under Order 29 of the Rules of Court 2012.
How long does a Mareva injunction last?
An ex parte Mareva injunction automatically lapses 21 days from the date it is granted and cannot be extended by the court. The court fixes an inter partes hearing within 14 days of the order to decide whether it should continue.
What is an Anton Piller order?
An Anton Piller order, now often called a search order, allows a plaintiff's solicitor to enter a defendant's premises to search for and preserve evidence that might otherwise be destroyed. Malaysian courts grant it on the same inherent jurisdiction recognised in the English case of Anton Piller KG v Manufacturing Processes Ltd, applied for by ex parte notice of application under Order 29.
What must I prove to get a freezing order?
You must show a good arguable case on the merits, a real risk that the defendant will dissipate or move assets before judgment, and you must give full and frank disclosure of all material facts, including facts unfavourable to your case. You will also need to give an undertaking to compensate the defendant if the claim ultimately fails.
Related reading
Assets or evidence at risk right now?
This is time-critical. Send us the facts on WhatsApp today and we will tell you immediately whether an urgent application is realistic.
This Is Urgent — WhatsApp NowThis page is general legal information current as of July 2026 and is not legal advice. It does not create a solicitor-client relationship and no outcome is guaranteed. Malaysian advocates and solicitors are not permitted to act on a "no win no fee" basis. Your specific circumstances may change which remedy applies — speak to one of our lawyers before acting on any deadline mentioned here.