International Asset Tracing in Divorce

International finances can make it difficult to establish the true value of the assets available for division following divorce; property may be registered through an overseas company, investments spread between several financial institutions, or money may have moved through digital wallets and foreign accounts.

Laurus provides strategic advice in complex financial cases and can coordinate the legal, investigative, and forensic work required to build an accurate picture of worldwide wealth. Speak to our specialist family solicitors to arrange an initial consultation and protect your position.

The purpose of international asset tracing

International asset tracing is the process of identifying, locating, and evidencing assets connected with another country. Both spouses must provide full and frank disclosure of their financial circumstances, and this obligation extends to assets held abroad. The Form E financial statement asks for extensive information about property, accounts, investments, business interests, and other resources. Where the documents do not tell a consistent story, international asset tracing may be necessary before negotiations can take place.

Indicators of undisclosed foreign wealth

Concern may arise when a spouse’s apparent lifestyle cannot be supported by their declared income, or when a previously successful business is said to have lost most of its value immediately before the divorce. Unexplained transfers to foreign recipients, repeated cash withdrawals, overseas travel linked to financial centres, and sudden changes to company ownership can also justify closer examination.

Other indicators may be less obvious, such as tax returns recording foreign income that does not appear in the Form E, or an insurance schedule referring to an overseas property that has not been disclosed. In addition, loan applications, immigration documents, currency exchange records, and communications with accountants can reveal assets or income streams omitted from the formal account of the finances.

Assets commonly investigated across borders

Commonly hidden assets include, but are not limited to the following:

• Foreign bank and investment accounts
• Residential or commercial property, land, shares
• Pensions
• Insurance products
• Interests in partnerships or private companies.
• Yachts, aircraft, valuable collections
• Intellectual property, income rights and debts owed to the spouse by an overseas person or business

The situation can be complicated further when business wealth is divided between a network of companies incorporated in different jurisdictions. The spouse may even claim that an offshore company belongs to a relative or independent investor, despite negotiating its contracts, receiving its profits, or exercising control over its bank accounts. Establishing legal ownership is therefore only part of the investigation; the court may also need evidence about beneficial ownership and actual control.

Cryptocurrency presents different challenges because tokens are recorded on a blockchain rather than held in a conventional account. Blockchain analysis may follow movements between wallet addresses, although connecting a wallet to a particular individual often requires supporting evidence from exchanges, devices, bank payments, or transaction records. Moving cryptocurrency through numerous wallets does not necessarily make it untraceable, but recovery may become much harder if the relevant keys and access credentials cannot be secured.

Legal measures supporting the tracing process

Where there is a real risk that property will be moved or dissipated, an application for a freezing injunction may be considered. This is a serious remedy and requires clear evidence, careful drafting, and compliance with duties owed to the court, particularly if an order is sought without advance notice. Depending upon the circumstances, the court may also order disclosure from a third party, direct the preservation of documents, or permit expert evidence.

The court has powers to potentially restrain a transaction, while one that has already occurred may be set aside. The precise remedy will depend upon matters including timing, intention, jurisdiction and the rights of the recipient.

An order does not automatically compel a foreign bank, registry, or trustee to provide information. Evidence may need to be obtained through local proceedings, judicial cooperation arrangements, or requests recognised by the foreign court. 

Privacy laws and practical obstacles

Some jurisdictions restrict public access to corporate ownership, trust information, land records, or banking material. Secrecy provisions may prevent an institution from responding directly to an English solicitor, while local courts may require a precisely formulated request supported by existing evidence.

Assets can also be held through several layers of companies, foundations, trusts and nominees situated in different countries. Even after ownership has been established, valuation and enforcement may remain difficult because exchange controls, tax liabilities, or third-party rights affect what the asset is actually worth.

These obstacles make proportionality essential; spending substantial sums to investigate a lead may reduce the resources available to both spouses. We can help clients prioritise enquiries by considering the suspected value, quality of the evidence, likely cost of obtaining records and prospects of enforcing any eventual order.

The effect upon settlement and court orders

A traced asset may substantially change the assessment of needs, sharing, and the resources available to the family. It may also support a revised valuation, justify a different division of known assets, or enable negotiations to proceed on the basis of verified wealth rather than incomplete estimates. In some cases, the most practical settlement is for one spouse to retain difficult overseas assets while the other receives a larger share of property or capital in England.

Concealment of assets may also affect credibility and costs. In these cases, the court can draw adverse inferences where explanations are implausible, require further disclosure, and order the defaulting party to contribute towards costs caused by their conduct. A settlement or order founded upon non or partial disclosure may be challenged at a later date, effectively reopening financial proceedings.

Early advice can prevent evidence from disappearing and ensure that any protective application is made before the asset is transferred again. Laurus can assess the available records, identify appropriate experts and develop a proportionate strategy for tracing, valuing and securing international assets.

Contact us now to request a free consultation with one of our specialist family solicitors.