Martina Yvonne Shand v Peter Edward Kemkers & Ors

Martina Yvonne Shand v Peter Edward Kemkers & Ors

Permission for contempt proceedings is refused and all allegations are struck out as totally without merit and an abuse of process. The applications are attempts to relitigate settled/discontinued matters, lack any realistic prospect of success, and are driven by collateral purpose. The 2025 action is struck out as totally without merit. An Extended Civil Restraint Order is imposed against Ms Shand for persistent unmeritorious litigation.

Parties
Claimant: Martina Yvonne Shand; Defendant: Peter Edward Kemkers; Defendant: Daniel Joseph Levy; Defendant: Jarret Bevan Brown; Defendant: John Bennett; Defendant: Jamie Charles Smith KC; Defendant: Timothy Hamar Chelmick; Defendant: Mishcon de Reya LLP; Defendant: DWF Law LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application and Strike Out Applications / Final Judgment on Permission and Strike Out
Outcome
Permission for contempt proceedings refused; all allegations struck out as totally without merit and abuse of process; 2025 action struck out; ECRO imposed.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Civil Restraint Orders, False Statements, Fraud on the Court, Conflict of Interest, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Professional Negligence Abuse of Process Civil Restraint Orders False Statements Fraud on the Court Conflict of Interest +1 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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martina Yvonne Shand

Claimant

Peter Edward Kemkers

Defendant

Daniel Joseph Levy

Defendant

Jarret Bevan Brown

Defendant

John Bennett

Defendant

Jamie Charles Smith KC

Defendant

Timothy Hamar Chelmick

Defendant

Mishcon de Reya LLP

Defendant

DWF Law LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application and Strike Out Applications / Final Judgment on Permission and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission should be granted for contempt proceedings against six defendants for alleged false statements and fraud on the court
  2. 2 Whether the applications and proceedings are an abuse of process and totally without merit
  3. 3 Whether the 2025 action against Mishcon and DWF should be struck out as totally without merit

Ratio Decidendi

Permission for contempt proceedings is refused and all allegations are struck out as totally without merit and an abuse of process. The applications are attempts to relitigate settled/discontinued matters, lack any realistic prospect of success, and are driven by collateral purpose. The 2025 action is struck out as totally without merit. An Extended Civil Restraint Order is imposed against Ms Shand for persistent unmeritorious litigation.

Court Disposition

Permission for contempt proceedings refused; all allegations struck out as totally without merit and abuse of process; 2025 action struck out; ECRO imposed.

Orders

  • Permission to pursue contempt proceedings against all defendants refused.
  • All contempt allegations struck out as totally without merit and abuse of process.