Klotho Brands Ltd v Stanford [2025] EWHC 2367 (Ch) (17 September 2025)

Klotho Brands Ltd v Stanford [2025] EWHC 2367 (Ch) (17 September 2025)

The respondent deliberately breached a valid court injunction on two occasions, causing serious harm and uncertainty. His applications to set aside or stay proceedings were without merit and did not affect the finding of contempt. Purported purging of contempt was ineffective. The appropriate sentence is 16 weeks' imprisonment on each count, to run consecutively, suspended for two years on condition of compliance with the injunction.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2367 (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
17 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application Within Civil Proceedings / Sentencing Following Finding of Contempt
Outcome
Respondent found in contempt of court; sentenced to 32 weeks' imprisonment (16 weeks per count, consecutive), sentence suspended for two years on condition of compliance with injunction; respondent's applications dismissed as totally without merit; costs reserved for determination on paper.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctions, Corporate Authority to Litigate, Purging Contempt, Suspended Sentences
Civil Procedure Company Law Equity and Trusts Contempt of Court Injunctions Corporate Authority to Litigate Purging Contempt Suspended Sentences

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
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 Within Civil Proceedings / Sentencing Following Finding of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's applications to set aside or stay the contempt proceedings had merit
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's breaches of the injunction constituted contempt of court
  3. 3 Appropriate sentence for contempt of court

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent deliberately breached a valid court injunction on two occasions, causing serious harm and uncertainty. His applications to set aside or stay proceedings were without merit and did not affect the finding of contempt. Purported purging of contempt was ineffective. The appropriate sentence is 16 weeks' imprisonment on each count, to run consecutively, suspended for two years on condition of compliance with the injunction.

Court Disposition

Respondent found in contempt of court; sentenced to 32 weeks' imprisonment (16 weeks per count, consecutive), sentence suspended for two years on condition of compliance with injunction; respondent's applications dismissed as totally without merit; costs reserved for determination on paper.

Orders

  • Respondent sentenced to 16 weeks' imprisonment on each of two counts, to run consecutively (total 32 weeks), sentence suspended for two years on condition of compliance with the injunction of 5 April 2022.
  • Respondent's applications of 13 August 2025, 4 September 2025, and 9 September 2025 dismissed as totally without merit.