Tsabi Ltd v Chowdhry & Anor [2025] EWHC 2543 (KB) (09 June 2025)

Tsabi Ltd v Chowdhry & Anor [2025] EWHC 2543 (KB) (09 June 2025)

Threats by the First Defendant to report the claimant to regulatory bodies and encouragement to breach confidentiality are extraneous to the proceedings and amount to improper threats, capable of constituting contempt. Permission to amend is not required, but would be granted if necessary due to strong prima facie case.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2543 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: TSABI LIMITED; First Defendant: SHERAZ CHOWDHRY; Second Defendant: GURMINDER GHUMAN
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Committal Application (contempt Proceedings) / Application to Amend Committal Grounds and for Permission
Outcome
Permission to amend committal application granted (if required); both grounds 4 and 12 allowed to proceed.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interference With Administration of Justice, Confidential Information, Springboard Injunction
Civil Procedure Employment Law Professional Regulation Contempt of Court Interference With Administration of Justice Confidential Information Springboard Injunction

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TSABI LIMITED

Claimant

SHERAZ CHOWDHRY

First Defendant

GURMINDER GHUMAN

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application (contempt Proceedings) / Application to Amend Committal Grounds and for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether threats to report claimant to regulatory bodies amount to contempt
  2. 2 Whether permission is required to amend committal application
  3. 3 Whether encouragement to divulge confidential information constitutes contempt

Ratio Decidendi

Threats by the First Defendant to report the claimant to regulatory bodies and encouragement to breach confidentiality are extraneous to the proceedings and amount to improper threats, capable of constituting contempt. Permission to amend is not required, but would be granted if necessary due to strong prima facie case.

Court Disposition

Permission to amend committal application granted (if required); both grounds 4 and 12 allowed to proceed.

Orders

  • Permission to amend committal application to include ground 12 against First Defendant (if required)
  • Permission to continue ground 4 against First Defendant (if required)