Klotho Brands Ltd v Stanford [2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch) (01 August 2025)

Klotho Brands Ltd v Stanford [2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch) (01 August 2025)

The respondent, with actual knowledge of the injunction, breached its terms by sending communications that, in substance, asserted rights or interests in the shares, notwithstanding disclaimers; personal service was properly dispensed with as he suffered no prejudice and had full awareness of the order.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/applicant: KLOTHO BRANDS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LION/HEAVEN UK II LIMITED); Defendant/respondent: KEVIN-GERALD STANFORD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KEVIN GERALD STANFORD)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application (civil) / Judgment on Liability for Contempt; Sentencing Adjourned
Outcome
Respondent found in contempt of court for breaching the injunction order of 5 April 2022.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctions, Share Ownership Disputes, Service of Court Orders, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
Civil Procedure Company Law Equity and Trusts Contempt of Court Injunctions Share Ownership Disputes Service of Court Orders Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

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 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KLOTHO BRANDS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LION/HEAVEN UK II LIMITED)

Claimant/applicant

KEVIN-GERALD STANFORD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KEVIN GERALD STANFORD)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application (civil) / Judgment on Liability for Contempt; Sentencing Adjourned

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent breached the terms of a court injunction restraining him from asserting rights or interests in certain shares
  2. 2 Whether the court should dispense with the requirement for personal service of the injunction order
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's communications constituted an assertion of rights or interests in the shares contrary to the injunction

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent, with actual knowledge of the injunction, breached its terms by sending communications that, in substance, asserted rights or interests in the shares, notwithstanding disclaimers; personal service was properly dispensed with as he suffered no prejudice and had full awareness of the order.

Court Disposition

Respondent found in contempt of court for breaching the injunction order of 5 April 2022.

Orders

  • Personal service of the 2022 order dispensed with.
  • Finding of contempt entered against the respondent.