Tower Bridge International Services LP v Viney [2025] EWHC 1184 (KB) (16 May 2025)

Tower Bridge International Services LP v Viney [2025] EWHC 1184 (KB) (16 May 2025)

Given the high culpability and harm of the contempts, involving deliberate, sustained, and concealed breaches of court orders in the context of a multi-million-pound fraud, only an immediate custodial sentence of 16 months' imprisonment is appropriate. Mitigation and late admissions warrant some reduction, but the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 1184 (KB)
Parties
Applicant / Claimant: Tower Bridge International Services L. P.; Defendant: Michael Viney
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Application / Sentencing Judgment Following Admission of Breaches
Outcome
Immediate committal to prison for 16 months for contempt of court; sentences for three contempts to run concurrently.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freezing Injunctions, Asset Dissipation, Disclosure Obligations, Sanctions for Breach of Court Orders
Civil Procedure Fraud Equity Contempt of Court Freezing Injunctions Asset Dissipation Disclosure Obligations Sanctions for Breach of Court Orders

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Tower Bridge International Services L. P.

Applicant / Claimant

Michael Viney

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application / Sentencing Judgment Following Admission of Breaches

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sanction for deliberate and repeated breaches of freezing and proprietary injunctions, including asset dissipation and non-disclosure, in the context of a high-value fraud?
  2. 2 Should the custodial sentence be immediate or suspended given the circumstances and mitigation?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the high culpability and harm of the contempts, involving deliberate, sustained, and concealed breaches of court orders in the context of a multi-million-pound fraud, only an immediate custodial sentence of 16 months' imprisonment is appropriate. Mitigation and late admissions warrant some reduction, but the gravity of the conduct decisively outweighs factors in favour of suspension.

Court Disposition

Immediate committal to prison for 16 months for contempt of court; sentences for three contempts to run concurrently.

Orders

  • Defendant committed to prison for 16 months for contempt of court.
  • Sentences for Contempt 1 (18 months, uplifted to 22 months, reduced to 16 months), Contempt 2 (6 months), and Contempt 3 (12 months) to run concurrently.