Colossiens SA v Societe Difezi & Fils SARL & Ors [2021] EWHC 3559 (Comm) (17 December 2021)

Colossiens SA v Societe Difezi & Fils SARL & Ors [2021] EWHC 3559 (Comm) (17 December 2021)

The defendants were aware of the disclosure order and failed to comply; the individuals were responsible for the company's non-compliance and are therefore in contempt. The seriousness and persistence of the breach justifies the maximum custodial sentence, with liberty to apply to vary or discharge the order.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 3559 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Colossiens SA; Defendant/respondent: Societe Difezi & Fils SARL; Defendant/respondent: Affoussatou Karimou; Defendant/respondent: Sanny Moukaila
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application in Enforcement Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing on Contempt and Sanctions
Outcome
Defendants found in contempt; custodial sentences imposed on individual defendants; costs awarded to claimant.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Asset Disclosure, Enforcement of Arbitration Awards, Service of Process
Civil Procedure Arbitration Commercial Law Contempt of Court Asset Disclosure Enforcement of Arbitration Awards Service of Process

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colossiens SA

Claimant/applicant

Societe Difezi & Fils SARL

Defendant/respondent

Affoussatou Karimou

Defendant/respondent

Sanny Moukaila

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application in Enforcement Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing on Contempt and Sanctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are in contempt of court for failing to comply with an asset disclosure order
  2. 2 Whether service of the relevant orders and application was properly effected
  3. 3 What sanctions are appropriate for the contempt

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were aware of the disclosure order and failed to comply; the individuals were responsible for the company's non-compliance and are therefore in contempt. The seriousness and persistence of the breach justifies the maximum custodial sentence, with liberty to apply to vary or discharge the order.

Court Disposition

Defendants found in contempt; custodial sentences imposed on individual defendants; costs awarded to claimant.

Orders

  • Societe Difezi & Fils SARL declared in contempt of court; no further sanction imposed on the company.
  • Affoussatou Karimou and Sanny Moukaila each committed to prison for two years for contempt, with liberty to apply to vary or discharge the order.