Asia Islamic Trade Finance Fund Ltd v Drum Risk Management Ltd & Ors

Asia Islamic Trade Finance Fund Ltd v Drum Risk Management Ltd & Ors

Mr. Doğan's breaches of the disclosure provisions in the freezing order were deliberate, serious, and prejudicial to the claimant. He had legal advice, was aware of the requirements, and made no genuine attempt to comply. The contempt warranted a significant custodial sentence to punish past breaches and coerce future compliance.

Parties
Claimant: Asia Islamic Trade Finance Fund Ltd; Defendant: Drum Risk Management Limited; Defendant: Arex LLP; Defendant: ASD Enerji Madencilik Petrol Ürünleri Sanayi ve Dış Ticaret Anonim Şirketi; Defendant: Atilla Doğan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Proceedings (commercial Freezing Order) / Sentencing After Finding of Contempt
Outcome
Mr. Doğan sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for contempt of court.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Asset Disclosure, Sanctions for Contempt, Enforcement of Court Orders
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Contempt of Court Freezing Orders Asset Disclosure Sanctions for Contempt Enforcement of Court Orders

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Asia Islamic Trade Finance Fund Ltd

Claimant

Drum Risk Management Limited

Defendant

Arex LLP

Defendant

ASD Enerji Madencilik Petrol Ürünleri Sanayi ve Dış Ticaret Anonim Şirketi

Defendant

Atilla Doğan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Proceedings (commercial Freezing Order) / Sentencing After Finding of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants, specifically Mr. Doğan, Arex LLP, and ASD, are in contempt of court for failing to comply with disclosure provisions in a freezing order
  2. 2 What is the appropriate penalty for the contempt

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Doğan's breaches of the disclosure provisions in the freezing order were deliberate, serious, and prejudicial to the claimant. He had legal advice, was aware of the requirements, and made no genuine attempt to comply. The contempt warranted a significant custodial sentence to punish past breaches and coerce future compliance.

Court Disposition

Mr. Doğan sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for contempt of court.

Orders

  • Liberty to apply to vary or remit the sentence if contempt is purged, with proper application and evidence served on claimant's solicitors.
  • Urging Mr. Doğan to comply fully and promptly with the disclosure order.