By Babayemi Olaniyan Esq, LL.M, Notary Public, ACIArb(UK), ACIS
Introduction
Concealment of assets[1] in the context of divorce is a deliberate act by one spouse to hide, misrepresent, or dissipate marital property to gain an unfair advantage during property settlement. Asset dissipation,[2] on the other hand, occurs when a spouse deliberately squanders marital wealth during the subsistence of the marriage or in the period leading up to the divorce, with the intent of frustrating a fair distribution.
At the heart of divorce proceedings lies the expectation that both parties will make full and honest disclosure of their assets and liabilities. Where this expectation is breached, the process of dividing property becomes unnecessarily complex, expensive, and adversarial.[3] Recognising these risks, Nigerian law provides the courts with strong legal tools to ensure transparency and fairness. This article examines the powers of the courts to trace, freeze, and order the forfeiture of hidden assets.
Legal Framework for Addressing Hidden Assets
Divorce proceedings are built on the assumption of honesty. Both spouses are under a duty to provide full financial disclosure of their assets, liabilities, and income. Where this duty is breached, the courts have broad powers to intervene.
- The Matrimonial Causes Act 1970. Sections 72 – 73 empower courts to make property settlement orders that are just and equitable. This includes measures to prevent dissipation of assets before judgment. Section 73(1)(i) gives the court discretion to make “any other order necessary to do justice.”
- The Matrimonial Causes Rules 1983. It provides the procedures for the discovery of documents (Order 11 Rule 5) and the enforcement of Decrees (Order 17).
- The Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, Cap. 407, LFN 1990. It provides the framework for enforcing court judgments, including freezing, forfeiture, and garnishee orders. Though its direct application in matrimonial proceedings is limited.
Judicial Guidance on Asset Concealment
One of the recurring challenges in divorce proceedings is the likelihood of a spouse to conceal or undervalue assets. Hidden assets can take many forms,[4] such as unreported income, offshore accounts, or even property transferred to family or friends. In matrimonial proceedings, parties are expected to disclose the full extent of their assets and debts so that the court can make a just and equitable decision.
The case of Oghoyone v Oghoyone[5] illustrates the importance Nigerian courts attach to full disclosure. In that case, a property not listed in the couple’s joint property records became a point of contention. The Court of Appeal affirmed that the trial court was right to order that the proceeds from the sale of the omitted property be shared equally. The court emphasised that, since the property was not captured in the written list (Exhibit P52), the trial judge had a duty to make a pronouncement on its status once the marriage was dissolved. In other words, undisclosed or omitted assets cannot simply slip through the cracks of divorce proceedings.
As another court put it In Re: Nigeria Customs Service Board,[6] “When it comes to concealment of material facts, whether it be fraudulent or a mere oversight, my stand has always been that the party whose right of action is concealed should not be made to suffer, and I cannot deviate.”
These authorities underscore a consistent judicial stance: in divorce cases, transparency and fairness take precedence over technicalities. Attempts at concealment will not only fail but may also invite closer judicial scrutiny.
Legal Options for Uncovering Hidden Assets
Where there is credible evidence that a spouse has concealed assets, Nigerian law provides a range of remedies to ensure fairness in divorce proceedings. These remedies are rooted in both equity and statutory authority, allowing courts to pierce through deception and preserve the integrity of the matrimonial process.
- Search Orders (Anton Piller Order)
These are court-sanctioned orders that permit the search and seizure of documents that can be granted to prevent destruction or concealment of financial records.
2. Tracing Orders
Tracing is an equitable tool that allows a claimant to follow misappropriated or hidden assets. In U.B.A. Plc v Wasiu,[7] the court explained the principle of tracing as the process of following “the original asset and enforce his equitable title to it or trace it into the substituted assets in the hand of the trustee or other fiduciary and enforce a proprietary remedy against it.” In other words, the law does not allow hidden or converted assets to vanish merely because they have been transformed into another form of property.
3. Mareva Injunctions (Freezing Orders)
This remedy is designed to preserve assets pending the outcome of litigation. In Haladu v Access Bank,[8] the court affirmed that “…a Mareva Injunction operates to stop a defendant against whom a claimant has a good arguable claim from disposing of or dissipating his assets pending the determination of the case or pending payment to the claimant.” It ensures that by the time a decision is reached, there are assets left to satisfy any judgment.
4. Forfeiture Orders
Where assets are obtained or retained unlawfully, courts may strip ownership without compensation. In Abacha v F.R.N.,[9] the Supreme Court defined forfeiture as “…the divestiture of property without compensation. The loss of a right, privilege, or property because of a crime, breach of obligation, or neglect of duty.” Once ordered, forfeited property is immediately transferred to another, such as the government.
5. Garnishee Proceedings
This remedy allows creditors, including spouses with court-awarded judgments, to recover money directly from a third party, such as a bank, that holds funds belonging to the debtor. It provides a practical enforcement mechanism to ensure that financial obligations determined by the court are not frustrated.
Conclusion
The concealment of assets in divorce proceedings undermines trust, frustrates justice, and if left unchecked, can leave one party unjustly disadvantaged. Nigerian law, however, is far from powerless in the face of such tactics. From tracing and freezing orders to forfeiture and garnishee proceedings, the courts are armed with tools to ensure that deception does not prevail over equity.
Looking ahead, as financial dealings grow more sophisticated and concealment strategies more complex, these remedies will continue to play a vital role in preserving the integrity of matrimonial justice.
Babayemi Olaniyan is the Lead Partner of Lehi Attorneys and a family law expert with years of expertise in resolving family law matters.
Contact
Email: yemiolaniyan00@gmail.com, www.lehiattorneys.com
Caveat! The content of this article is for educational purposes and is intended to provide a general understanding of the topic discussed. It is not intended to serve as legal advice whatsoever. If the contents appeal to you and you would want further clarification on any of the points raised therein, do not hesitate to send a mail.
[1] Jesūs Becerra, ‘What is Concealment of assets?’ 1 June 2022 <https://jesusbecerra.com/en/blog/concealment-of-assets> accessed 15 August 2025
[2] Powers Kerr & Rashidi, PLLC, ‘What Is Asset Concealment And Dissipation In A Divorce?’ 7 April 2025 <https://www.pkrfamilylaw.com/familylawblog/what-is-asset-concealment-and-dissipation-in-a-divorce> accessed 15 August 2025
[3] ‘Legal Strategies for Addressing Asset Concealment in Divorce,’ 19 June 2024 <https://www.mebryantlaw.com/2024/06/19/legal-strategies-for-addressing-asset-concealment-in-divorce/> accessed 15 August 2025
[4] Andrea Dyer, “A Guide to Hidden Assets and Divorce,’ 3 August 2023 <https://www.wardhadaway.com/insights/updates/a-guide-to-hidden-assets-and-divorce/> accessed 15 August 2025
[5] (2010) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1182) 564 at 582 – 584, paras D-C
[6] (2022) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1825) 67 at 98, para C
[7] (2017) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1555) 318 at 339, paras C-D
[8] (2021) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1794) 434 at 457, paras C-D
[9] (2014) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1402) 43 at 91, para G