Moutreuil v Andreewitch (Contempt: No.2)

Moutreuil v Andreewitch (Contempt: No.2)

The First Respondent deliberately breached the freezing order by making/procuring payments from the company account for personal benefit, knowing such payments were not permitted by the order; explanations regarding director's salary, loan repayments, and legal costs were found to be contrived, unsupported by evidence, and not credible.

Parties
Applicant: Magali Moutreuil; First Respondent: Peter Andreewitch; Second Respondent: Pier Investments Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application (family Division) / Judgment Following Re Hearing on Alleged Contempt of Court
Outcome
Findings of deliberate breach of the freezing order; issue of sanction adjourned.
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Court Orders, Committal Proceedings, Variation of Orders, Director's Duties, Use of Company Assets
Family Law Civil Procedure Company Law Freezing Orders Contempt of Court Enforcement of Court Orders Committal Proceedings Variation of Orders +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magali Moutreuil

Applicant

Peter Andreewitch

First Respondent

Pier Investments Company Limited

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application (family Division) / Judgment Following Re Hearing on Alleged Contempt of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent breached the freezing order of 22 March 2019
  2. 2 Whether the breaches were deliberate and in contempt of court
  3. 3 Whether payments from the company account were justified as company liabilities

Ratio Decidendi

The First Respondent deliberately breached the freezing order by making/procuring payments from the company account for personal benefit, knowing such payments were not permitted by the order; explanations regarding director's salary, loan repayments, and legal costs were found to be contrived, unsupported by evidence, and not credible.

Court Disposition

Findings of deliberate breach of the freezing order; issue of sanction adjourned.

Orders

  • Adjournment of sanction to a date to be fixed before the same judge.
  • Sanction to be determined at a later hearing.