Sheikh Abdulrahman Khalid Bin Mahfouz & Ors v El-Rashid & Ors [2017] EWHC 1460 (Comm) (22 June 2017)

Sheikh Abdulrahman Khalid Bin Mahfouz & Ors v El-Rashid & Ors [2017] EWHC 1460 (Comm) (22 June 2017)

The First Defendant was in contempt of court by failing to provide full details of the dissipation of €35m as required by the Freezing Order, failing to disclose all bank accounts under his control, and failing to give access to or disclose the location of vehicles as required by the Vehicle Order. The court was sure of these breaches to the criminal standard. The allegation regarding failure to disclose ownership of six cars was not proved to the criminal standard.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1460 (Comm)
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Sheikh Abdulrahman Khalid Bin Mahfouz; Applicant/claimant: Sheikh Sultan Bin Mahfouz; Applicant/claimant: Eman Bin Mahfouz; Applicant/claimant: Naela Bint Abdulaziz Mohammed Kaki; Applicant/claimant: Arab Asian International Holding Company BSC (Closed); Respondent/first Defendant: Muhaned Farid Mahmoud El-Rashid; Second Defendant: Noble Holdings Group Corporation; Third Defendant: Ms Loreta Stakauskaite
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application (committal) in Civil Proceedings / Judgment on Committal Application
Outcome
First Defendant found in contempt of court on three principal grounds; sentencing adjourned for mitigation.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freezing Orders, Asset Disclosure, Enforcement of Judgments
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Asset Disclosure Enforcement of Judgments

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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheikh Abdulrahman Khalid Bin Mahfouz

Applicant/claimant

Sheikh Sultan Bin Mahfouz

Applicant/claimant

Eman Bin Mahfouz

Applicant/claimant

Naela Bint Abdulaziz Mohammed Kaki

Applicant/claimant

Arab Asian International Holding Company BSC (Closed)

Applicant/claimant

Muhaned Farid Mahmoud El-Rashid

Respondent/first Defendant

Noble Holdings Group Corporation

Second Defendant

Ms Loreta Stakauskaite

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application (committal) in Civil Proceedings / Judgment on Committal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant is in contempt of court for breaches of the Freezing Order and Vehicle Order

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant was in contempt of court by failing to provide full details of the dissipation of €35m as required by the Freezing Order, failing to disclose all bank accounts under his control, and failing to give access to or disclose the location of vehicles as required by the Vehicle Order. The court was sure of these breaches to the criminal standard. The allegation regarding failure to disclose ownership of six cars was not proved to the criminal standard.

Court Disposition

First Defendant found in contempt of court on three principal grounds; sentencing adjourned for mitigation.

Orders

  • Claimants to provide First Defendant with a copy of the judgment and inform him of the date for formal hand down.