Freezing orders and enforcing foreign judgments in Australia
Reviewed by Justin Chua, principal, Chua Tan Associates · Updated 18 October 2026
A freezing order stops a person from moving or dealing with assets until a court has decided the claim, so that any judgment is not left worthless. Australian courts can also enforce many judgments from Asia and New Zealand: Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan judgments can usually be registered under the Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth), while mainland Chinese judgments must be sued on at common law.
What a freezing order is
A freezing order (often called a Mareva order) is an interim court order that restrains a person from removing assets from Australia, or from disposing of, dealing with or reducing the value of them, up to a set amount. In Victoria, Order 37A of the Supreme Court and County Court rules governs these orders. The purpose is to protect the court’s process, not to give the applicant security. The order usually still allows ordinary living expenses, reasonable legal costs and ordinary business debts to be paid.
The test
In broad terms, the applicant must show:
- a good arguable case on an accrued or prospective cause of action (or an existing judgment, including a foreign judgment that has a sufficient prospect of being registered or enforced here); and
- a danger that a judgment will be wholly or partly unsatisfied because the respondent might abscond, or assets might be removed from Australia or disposed of, dealt with or diminished in value.
The danger must be shown by evidence, not suspicion. In cross-border matters we look for a recent listing or transfer of property, money moved offshore after the dispute arose, or a history of not paying judgments elsewhere. Living overseas or holding assets in several countries is rarely enough on its own.
Worldwide freezing orders and disclosure orders
A court can make a freezing order over assets outside Australia, for example a flat in Hong Kong or shares in a Malaysian company. Courts are more cautious here, and the applicant usually undertakes not to enforce the order overseas without the court’s permission. Whether a foreign bank or court will respect the order is a separate question for that country’s law.
Freezing orders are usually made with ancillary orders requiring the respondent to swear an affidavit disclosing their assets, where they are and their value.
The undertaking as to damages and the duty of candour
The applicant must normally give the usual undertaking as to damages: a promise to compensate the respondent (and affected third parties) if it later turns out the order should not have been made. An applicant without assets in Australia may be asked to provide security.
Most freezing orders are first sought without notice to the other side, because notice would defeat the purpose. That brings a strict duty of full and frank disclosure: the applicant must tell the court about all material facts, including likely defences and anything that weakens the case. An order obtained without proper disclosure can be discharged on that ground alone. The first order normally lasts only until a return date a few days later.
Search orders, briefly
A search order (Anton Piller order, Order 37B in Victoria) allows evidence at real risk of destruction to be secured from premises, under the supervision of an independent solicitor. It requires a strong prima facie case and clear evidence that important material might be destroyed. These orders are rare.
Freezing assets while suing overseas
A freezing order can be made in Australia even though the main case is being fought in another country. In [PT Bayan Resources TBK v BCBC Singapore Pte Ltd [2015] HCA 36](https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2015/36.html), a Singapore company was suing an Indonesian company in the High Court of Singapore over a joint venture. The High Court of Australia upheld a Western Australian freezing order over the Indonesian company’s Australian shareholding, made before any Singapore judgment existed. The lesson: if the reachable assets are in Australia, you can act here before the overseas case ends.
Enforcing foreign judgments: the statutory route
The Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth) allows money judgments of listed courts to be registered in the Supreme Court of a State, after which they are enforced like a local judgment. We have checked the schedule to the Foreign Judgments Regulations 1992 for the jurisdictions our clients ask about most:
- Hong Kong: the Court of Final Appeal and the High Court (Court of Appeal and Court of First Instance) are listed.
- Singapore: the Supreme Court (Court of Appeal and High Court) is listed.
- Taiwan: the Supreme Court, High Courts and District Courts are listed.
- Mainland China, Macau, Malaysia and Indonesia are not listed.
The application must be made within 6 years after the date of the judgment or of the last appeal. The judgment must be final and conclusive and for a sum of money (not tax or a penalty). Registration can be set aside on limited grounds, such as lack of jurisdiction in the original court, fraud, the debtor not having had notice in time to defend, or public policy.
Mainland China and other unlisted countries: the common law route
Where a country is not listed, the judgment creditor sues in Australia on the foreign judgment as a debt. Generally the foreign court must have had jurisdiction recognised by Australian law (for example, the debtor was present there or submitted to it), the judgment must be final and conclusive, the parties must be the same, and the sum must be fixed. The Australian court does not rehear the merits.
In [Bao v Qu; Tian (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 588](https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2020/588.html), the NSW Supreme Court enforced a Qingdao court judgment for an unpaid loan of about RMB 2 million against a couple living in Sydney, and refused to revisit repayment arguments that could have been run in China. In [Bank of China Ltd v Chen [2022] NSWSC 749](https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2022/749.html), dealing with a challenge to service, the Court accepted that civil mediation decisions of a Chinese People’s Court in a loan dispute were judgments that could be enforced at common law. The lesson: a Chinese judgment against someone living in Australia should not be ignored.
New Zealand and arbitral awards
New Zealand judgments, including many non-money judgments, are registered in Australian courts under the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010 (Cth), and can be set aside only on narrow grounds such as public policy.
Foreign arbitral awards are enforced under the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth), which gives effect to the New York Convention. Mainland China (with the Convention extended to Hong Kong and Macau), Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and New Zealand are Convention parties. Taiwan is not, so the position for a Taiwanese award needs separate advice.
Costs and risk
Freezing applications are urgent and front-loaded in cost. Before applying, weigh the size of the claim, where the assets really are and the risk on the undertaking. Enforcing an Australian judgment overseas, especially in mainland China, can be slow and uncertain, so where the assets are matters more than where the judgment is.
How we help
Chua Tan Associates acts in freezing order and enforcement matters in English, Mandarin and Cantonese. Where both sides are willing, a private resolution can be arranged through the Chinese Australian Dispute Resolution Centre (CADRC). Contact us on +61 3 9602 3988.
FAQs
Can I get a freezing order without telling the other side?
Yes, often, but you must disclose all material facts, including points against you, and the order is reviewed at a hearing shortly afterwards.
What happens if the freezing order should not have been made?
You may be ordered to compensate the respondent and affected third parties under your undertaking as to damages, which is why the evidence of risk must be solid.
Can a Chinese court judgment be enforced in Victoria?
Mainland China is not listed under the Foreign Judgments Act, but NSW cases show a Chinese money judgment can be enforced by suing on it at common law, if the usual requirements are met.
Is there a time limit to register a Hong Kong or Singapore judgment?
Yes. An application under the Foreign Judgments Act must be made within 6 years after the judgment or the last appeal.
Can an Australian court freeze assets for a case being heard overseas?
Yes, if there is a sufficient prospect that the foreign judgment will be registered or enforced here, as the High Court confirmed in the PT Bayan case.
Talk to us about your matter
Book a confidential consultation in English, Mandarin or Cantonese, or call +61 3 9602 3988.
Book a consultation
General information only, not legal advice. Every matter turns on its own facts. Reviewed by Justin Chua, principal, Chua Tan Associates.
简体中文 
English (Australia) 
繁體中文