Preventing destruction of evidence: search and imaging orders in fraud cases

In fraud and asset recovery cases, there are situations where there is a genuine and real risk that critical evidence will be concealed, altered, or destroyed. In such circumstances, the English courts can grant a combined search and imaging order, a combined remedy designed to protect both physical documents and electronic data.

They are typically granted without notice to the respondent, making them an effective yet draconian tool in complex civil fraud disputes.

Search order

A search order (previously known as an Anton Piller order) authorises the applicant’s legal team, under the supervision of an independent solicitor, to enter the respondent’s premises to search for, inspect and seize evidence relevant to the proceedings.

Because of their invasive and one-sided nature, search orders are granted on an interim basis in exceptional circumstances. The court will only grant such an order where less intrusive measures would not achieve the necessary protection.

Search orders can play a critical role in reinforcing other remedies within the fraud and asset recovery toolkit, such as freezing orders. For instance, in Isbilen v Turk [2022] EWHC 572 (Ch), the High Court granted a search order against a defendant who had breached their disclosure obligations under a worldwide freezing order concerning $50m in misappropriated funds.

Given that search orders can be deployed to support other court orders, and are not confined to being granted at the outset of proceedings, they can be a highly effective mechanism in complex asset recovery cases.

In certain cases, the court may grant a search order against a foreign defendant or even in relation to premises located overseas, underscoring the broad and international reach of this remedy.

Imaging order

Imaging orders give the applicant the right to create a digital copy of electronic data held by the defendant across sources such as computers, mobile devices, cloud-based storage and online accounts, including email and payment systems. The primary aim is to preserve evidence which might otherwise be deleted, destroyed or concealed.

Under a standard imaging order, the copied data is secured and stored by the supervising solicitor, an independent solicitor experienced in executing search orders, who is not affiliated with the applicant’s firm. The data cannot be accessed without the court's approval.

Accordingly, the purpose of an imaging order is not to obtain early disclosure. In most cases, preserving the data is sufficient, but in matters involving allegations of fraud, an urgent review may be necessary to trace assets or identify additional wrongdoers.

Obtaining a search and imaging order

Since April 2025, parties have been able to apply for a combined search and imaging order. This facilitates an efficient process for claimants seeking to search for and protect evidence in high-value disputes.

An application for a combined order can be made against a defendant, proposed defendant or third party, before or during proceedings. Applications are usually supported by an affidavit setting out the material facts. The applicant owes a duty of full and frank disclosure, meaning they must present both helpful and adverse facts to the court.

There is a high bar for granting a combined order. The applicant must satisfy the court that:

• there is an extremely strong case on the merits;
• the respondent’s conduct has caused serious harm to the claimant’s interests;
• there is clear evidence that the respondent holds incriminating material and that there is a real risk it will be destroyed or concealed before an application can be made on notice; and
• the harm to the respondent will not be disproportionate.

To balance the respondent’s rights, the court imposes strict conditions:

• A supervising solicitor must oversee the search to ensure compliance and explain the order to the respondent.
• The applicant must give an undertaking in damages, promising to compensate the respondent if the order was wrongly granted.
• Additional undertakings may cover the handling of seized material and confidentiality obligations.

To meet the rise and increasing sophistication of fraud, victims need powerful legal tools and lawyers who know how to use them. In this guide, we provide an overview of the key issues involved in fraud cases and outline some of the fraud litigation tools available in England.

READ MORE

This publication is a general summary of the law. It should not replace legal advice tailored to your specific circumstances.

© Farrer & Co LLP, June 2026