Case study: tracing fraud proceeds through Switzerland – financial forensics

A payment leaves a corporate account on a Thursday afternoon. By Friday it has cleared a Swiss correspondent bank, split across two accounts, and disappeared into a holding structure that does not, on its face, connect to any known party. That is where most trails are abandoned. It is rarely where ours end.

Tracing fraud proceeds through Switzerland is possible even when the paper trail appears incomplete. The tools available – including a Bankers Trust order, a Norwich Pharmal order, and disclosure orders directed at the Swiss intermediary chain – allow a disciplined analyst to reconstruct where value moved and where it settled. The process is slower than in common-law jurisdictions, but it is not closed. Local admitted counsel in Switzerland must act on the ground; Axiom Trace coordinates the forensic and strategic layer.

This case study follows one such matter: a commercial fraud originating in the Gulf, with proceeds routed through Switzerland before settling into a controlled offshore structure. Names, amounts, and identifying details have been changed or generalised.

Situation: A Layered Disappearance

The client was an insolvency practitioner appointed over a trading company. On appointment, a significant shortfall was apparent – funds in the high seven figures that had been paid out in the months before insolvency. The payments were described in the company's records as "management fees" and "advisory retainers." No corresponding services were identified.

The recipients were two Swiss-registered entities. Both had nominee directors and no identifiable beneficial owner in the public register. One had already closed its account by the time the IP was appointed. The initial picture was poor: incomplete internal records, a resigned auditor, and counterparties that did not respond to correspondence.

The instruction to us arrived roughly eight weeks after appointment – later than ideal, but not too late. In asset tracing matters, the relevant question is not whether a delay has occurred but whether the value has moved again since the last known position. Here, we had reason to believe it had not.

Strategy: Working the Intermediary Chain

We do not begin with the destination. We begin at the point of departure, where records are most complete, and work forward. In this matter, the client's own bank retained transaction records and SWIFT message logs. That gave us routing information: the identity of the Swiss correspondent bank and the internal account numbers the funds had passed through.

The strategy had three components. First, a Bankers Trust order directed at the correspondent bank, compelling disclosure of account details and onward routing. Second, a Norwich Pharmal order requiring a Swiss fiduciary service provider – identified through corporate registry analysis – to disclose the beneficial owner behind both receiving entities. Third, a proprietary injunction applied for on short notice once we had sufficient identifying information, to preserve any remaining balance.

Switzerland is a coordinate jurisdiction for these purposes: local admitted counsel must file all applications, and Swiss procedural rules govern timing and admissibility. We coordinated closely with local counsel throughout. The forensic layer – constructing the payment reconstruction, identifying the intermediaries, preparing the factual matrix for each application – was our work.

The contextual bridge: this stage is where matters either progress or stall. The difference is almost always the quality of the forensic preparation before the first application is filed. A poorly framed disclosure request is refused; a well-constructed one proceeds. To assess whether your matter is at a stage where this approach is viable, contact info@axiomtracel.com.

Process: Reconstruction from Partial Records

The company's own records were incomplete. Key payment instructions had been deleted. The bank's records were more useful – SWIFT messages, correspondent account references, and a partial audit trail that the company's management had not known existed.

From that partial foundation, we rebuilt the payment trail in four layers. The originating accounts were confirmed. The Swiss correspondent routing was confirmed. The two receiving entities were identified in the Swiss commercial register and linked, through a UBO register query and a corporate registry search in a second offshore jurisdiction, to a single individual. That individual had signed one of the management fee agreements on behalf of the company – as a signatory on the other side of the transaction.

This pattern – a person positioned on both sides of a fraudulent payment – is one we have seen across a range of commercial fraud matters. It does not require sophisticated concealment. It requires only that no one is looking. In our experience, the paper trail in these matters is rarely as dead as it first appears. The gaps are real, but the gaps have edges, and edges connect.

The Bankers Trust order returned account opening documents and a forwarding instruction to a private bank in Liechtenstein. That led to a separate tracing strand – one we have described in more detail in our analysis of tracing bank transfers through Liechtenstein. The proprietary injunction was granted before the Liechtenstein account was notified of proceedings, preserving a material balance.

Transferable Lessons

Three lessons from this matter apply broadly to asset tracing through Switzerland.

First, the correspondent bank layer is often the most productive forensic entry point. Swiss private banks and holding structures are opaque. The correspondent routing layer – which sits inside the international payments system – retains more information for longer and is more susceptible to disclosure orders in other jurisdictions.

Second, nominee structures do not defeat UBO analysis. The existence of a UBO register, combined with a Norwich Pharmal order against a fiduciary that registered the entity, will in most cases produce a name – even when the public register shows only a nominee. The question is whether the registered fiduciary is reachable by disclosure process.

Third, speed matters at the injunction stage, not the tracing stage. Tracing can be reconstructed; dissipation cannot be undone. In this matter, the proprietary injunction was obtained before onward movement occurred. That preserved optionality. Matters where the instruction arrives later often present a more difficult forensic picture – not because the trail is gone, but because the value has moved again, requiring another round of disclosure applications.

We regularly advise insolvency practitioners and referring lawyers on whether a Swiss-routed matter is at a recoverable stage. The full picture of what a forensic tracing engagement in Switzerland involves is set out in our financial forensics practice overview and our Switzerland jurisdiction guide.

If you are dealing with a matter where funds have moved through Switzerland and the trail appears incomplete, a confidential case review is the right starting point. Contact info@axiomtracel.com.

About Axiom Trace

Axiom Trace is an independent boutique focused on cross-border and crypto asset recovery. We trace assets that have moved across borders or on-chain and coordinate their freezing and recovery – working with defrauded principals, insolvency practitioners, and the lawyers and funders who refer them. We work lawfully and within applicable sanctions regimes, alongside local counsel where proceedings must be filed. We have reconstructed payment trails from partial and deleted records across multiple jurisdictions, and we have coordinated disclosure applications that produced identifying information where none was initially visible. To discuss a matter, contact info@axiomtracel.com.

Disclaimer: This publication is for general information only and is not legal advice, nor a promise or prediction of recovery. No outcome is guaranteed. Asset recovery depends on the specific facts and on the law and procedure of each relevant jurisdiction, where local admitted counsel must act. Axiom Trace coordinates closely with admitted local counsel in Switzerland; local procedure governs the filing. Axiom Trace assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on this material. For advice on your situation, contact info@axiomtracel.com.