UK (Aid) Ltd v Mitchell & Ors [2007] EWHC 1940 (Ch) (31 July 2007)

UK (Aid) Ltd v Mitchell & Ors [2007] EWHC 1940 (Ch) (31 July 2007)

The first defendant, Martin Mitchell, was found to have committed grave and sustained breaches of the freezing order by dealing with assets, failing to disclose assets, and providing false affidavits, all with knowledge of the order and intent to frustrate its purpose. The third defendant, Steven Silverman, was not found to have knowingly breached the order at the time of the relevant asset transfer, as the court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he had knowledge of the order when he acted.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1940 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: UK (Aid) Limited; First Defendant: Martin Damian Andrew Mitchell; Second Defendant: Leslie John Silverman; Third Defendant: Steven Andrew Silverman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Judgment After Hearing of Committal Applications
Outcome
First defendant committed to prison for eight months for contempt of court; application against third defendant dismissed.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freezing Orders, Asset Disclosure, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Summary Judgment
Civil Procedure Insolvency Company Law Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Asset Disclosure Breach of Fiduciary Duty Summary Judgment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 16
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UK (Aid) Limited

Claimant

Martin Damian Andrew Mitchell

First Defendant

Leslie John Silverman

Second Defendant

Steven Andrew Silverman

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt of Court / Judgment After Hearing of Committal Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first and third defendants committed contempt of court by breaching freezing and disclosure orders
  2. 2 Whether the first defendant failed to disclose assets and dealt with assets in breach of the order
  3. 3 Whether the third defendant participated in dissipation of assets in breach of the order

Ratio Decidendi

The first defendant, Martin Mitchell, was found to have committed grave and sustained breaches of the freezing order by dealing with assets, failing to disclose assets, and providing false affidavits, all with knowledge of the order and intent to frustrate its purpose. The third defendant, Steven Silverman, was not found to have knowingly breached the order at the time of the relevant asset transfer, as the court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he had knowledge of the order when he acted.

Court Disposition

First defendant committed to prison for eight months for contempt of court; application against third defendant dismissed.

Orders

  • Martin Mitchell committed to prison for eight months for contempt of court.
  • No order for committal made against Steven Silverman; application dismissed.