Minstrell Recruitment Ltd v Lockett & Anor

Minstrell Recruitment Ltd v Lockett & Anor

Mr. Lockett was found to have deliberately and recklessly breached court orders by making untrue and disparaging statements about Minstrell and its directors, despite clear warnings and knowledge of the injunction. His actions were motivated by a desire to harm Minstrell's business and reputation, and he showed no genuine remorse or insight. Mitigating factors, including provocation, harassment by Minstrell employees, and some underlying factual basis for his criticisms, reduced but did not excuse his culpability. The breaches were so serious that only an immediate custodial sentence was appropriate.

Parties
Claimant: Minstrell Recruitment Limited; First Defendant: John Lockett; Second Defendant: Lion Recruitment Solutions Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application (civil) / Judgment After Trial and Sanction
Outcome
Application for committal granted in part; Mr. Lockett found in contempt of court and sentenced to immediate imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Breach of Injunction, Restrictive Covenants, Employment Disputes, Harassment, Costs
Civil Procedure Employment Law Contempt of Court Breach of Injunction Restrictive Covenants Employment Disputes Harassment 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minstrell Recruitment Limited

Claimant

John Lockett

First Defendant

Lion Recruitment Solutions Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application (civil) / Judgment After Trial and Sanction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Lockett was in contempt of court for breaching court orders, including making untrue disparaging statements about Minstrell and its directors, failing to deliver up property, and failing to provide affidavits as ordered.
  2. 2 Whether the breaches were deliberate, reckless, or mitigated by state of mind or provocation.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of Minstrell's employees and directors, including fabrication of evidence, affected the proceedings or sanction.

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Lockett was found to have deliberately and recklessly breached court orders by making untrue and disparaging statements about Minstrell and its directors, despite clear warnings and knowledge of the injunction. His actions were motivated by a desire to harm Minstrell's business and reputation, and he showed no genuine remorse or insight. Mitigating factors, including provocation, harassment by Minstrell employees, and some underlying factual basis for his criticisms, reduced but did not excuse his culpability. The breaches were so serious that only an immediate custodial sentence was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Application for committal granted in part; Mr. Lockett found in contempt of court and sentenced to immediate imprisonment.

Orders

  • Mr. Lockett committed to prison for 12 months for contempt of court.
  • Permanent injunction granted in the form of paragraph 4 of HHJ Eyre QC’s order of 28 September 2018.