SIA Investment Industry v Pardus Wealth Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 269 (Comm) (07 February 2025)

SIA Investment Industry v Pardus Wealth Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 269 (Comm) (07 February 2025)

Gregory Robert Bryce committed three serious, deliberate, and continuing breaches of a freezing order and associated disclosure obligations, causing significant prejudice to the applicant. His mental health and mitigation do not sufficiently reduce culpability or justify suspension. Only an immediate custodial sentence is appropriate. The applicant is entitled to indemnity costs due to the seriousness and persistence of the breaches.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 269 (Comm)
Parties
Applicant/claimant in Arbitration: SIA Investment Industry; Respondent/defendant in Arbitration: Pardus Wealth Limited; Respondent/defendant in Arbitration: Gregory Robert Bryce
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim (committal for Contempt) / Sanction Judgment Following Finding of Contempt
Outcome
Immediate custodial sentence imposed; costs awarded to applicant on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freezing Orders, Disclosure Orders, Sanctions, Costs
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Disclosure Orders Sanctions Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SIA Investment Industry

Applicant/claimant in Arbitration

Pardus Wealth Limited

Respondent/defendant in Arbitration

Gregory Robert Bryce

Respondent/defendant in Arbitration

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim (committal for Contempt) / Sanction Judgment Following Finding of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sanction for Gregory Robert Bryce's contempt of court by breaching a freezing order and associated disclosure orders?
  2. 2 Should the sentence be immediate custody, suspended, or a fine?
  3. 3 Is the applicant entitled to indemnity costs?

Ratio Decidendi

Gregory Robert Bryce committed three serious, deliberate, and continuing breaches of a freezing order and associated disclosure obligations, causing significant prejudice to the applicant. His mental health and mitigation do not sufficiently reduce culpability or justify suspension. Only an immediate custodial sentence is appropriate. The applicant is entitled to indemnity costs due to the seriousness and persistence of the breaches.

Court Disposition

Immediate custodial sentence imposed; costs awarded to applicant on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • Gregory Robert Bryce committed to 15 months' imprisonment for contempt of court, with the possibility of reduction to not less than 6 months if contempt is purged by full compliance with the freezing order's disclosure and affidavit requirements.
  • Warrant of committal issued with power of arrest attached.