Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick & Ors [2006] EWHC 3087 (Ch) (13 November 2006)

Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick & Ors [2006] EWHC 3087 (Ch) (13 November 2006)

Both Mr and Mrs Metterick deliberately breached freezing orders with knowledge of their existence, intending to undermine the orders. The breaches were serious and contumacious. Mr Metterick is sentenced to eight weeks' imprisonment. Mrs Metterick is sentenced to eight weeks' imprisonment, suspended on conditions relating to repayment, due to her acting under instruction, her health, and family offers to repay.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 3087 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Crystal Mews Limited; First Defendant: Metterick; Fourth Defendant: Mrs Metterick
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings Following Breach of Freezing Orders in Company Winding Up Context / Penalty Determination After Findings and Admissions of Contempt
Outcome
Mr Metterick committed to prison for eight weeks; Mrs Metterick committed for eight weeks, sentence suspended on conditions of repayment.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Mareva Injunction, Breach of Court Orders, Committal for Contempt, Remedies for Contempt
Insolvency Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Freezing Injunctions Mareva Injunction Breach of Court Orders Committal for Contempt Remedies for Contempt

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crystal Mews Limited

Claimant

Metterick

First Defendant

Mrs Metterick

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings Following Breach of Freezing Orders in Company Winding Up Context / Penalty Determination After Findings and Admissions of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate penalty for admitted and proven breaches of freezing orders by Mr and Mrs Metterick?
  2. 2 What factors should be considered in sentencing for contempt of court in the context of freezing injunctions?

Ratio Decidendi

Both Mr and Mrs Metterick deliberately breached freezing orders with knowledge of their existence, intending to undermine the orders. The breaches were serious and contumacious. Mr Metterick is sentenced to eight weeks' imprisonment. Mrs Metterick is sentenced to eight weeks' imprisonment, suspended on conditions relating to repayment, due to her acting under instruction, her health, and family offers to repay.

Court Disposition

Mr Metterick committed to prison for eight weeks; Mrs Metterick committed for eight weeks, sentence suspended on conditions of repayment.

Orders

  • Mr Metterick to serve eight weeks' imprisonment for contempt, sentences concurrent for all breaches.
  • Mrs Metterick to serve eight weeks' imprisonment for contempt, sentence suspended on condition that £5,000 is reimbursed into her account subject to the freezing order within a period to be determined and £400 per month is paid into the same account.