Thomas & Anor (Joint Liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd) v Jakes & Anor [2012] EWHC 525 (Ch) (09 March 2012)

Thomas & Anor (Joint Liquidators of GBI Investments Ltd) v Jakes & Anor [2012] EWHC 525 (Ch) (09 March 2012)

The respondents committed contempt of court by (1) disposing of the shares to the Slovak liquidator in breach of the First Order, and (2) deliberately deceiving the court as to the location and control of the shares at the July 2011 hearing. The contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt. Failure to deliver up the shares after the Second Order was not contempt, as the respondents had already put compliance out of their power before the order was made.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 525 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Simon Robert Thomas; Applicant: Robert Harry Pick; Company in Liquidation: GBI Investments Limited; Respondent: Boris Jakes; Respondent: Juraj Nestarec
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court (committal Application) / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Pending Submissions on Penalty
Outcome
Contempt of court proved against both respondents on two grounds; penalty to be determined after further submissions.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Enforcement of Court Orders, Personal Service Requirements, Cross Border Insolvency, False Evidence/deception of Court
Insolvency Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Enforcement of Court Orders Personal Service Requirements Cross Border Insolvency False Evidence/deception of Court

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

Parties

Simon Robert Thomas

Applicant

Robert Harry Pick

Applicant

GBI Investments Limited

Company in Liquidation

Boris Jakes

Respondent

Juraj Nestarec

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court (committal Application) / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Pending Submissions on Penalty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents committed contempt of court by (i) failing to deliver up shares as ordered, (ii) disposing of shares contrary to court order, (iii) advancing a false case to the court

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents committed contempt of court by (1) disposing of the shares to the Slovak liquidator in breach of the First Order, and (2) deliberately deceiving the court as to the location and control of the shares at the July 2011 hearing. The contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt. Failure to deliver up the shares after the Second Order was not contempt, as the respondents had already put compliance out of their power before the order was made.

Court Disposition

Contempt of court proved against both respondents on two grounds; penalty to be determined after further submissions.

Orders

  • Finding of contempt against Boris Jakes and Juraj Nestarec for (i) breach of First Order by disposing of shares, (ii) deliberate deception of the court; penalty hearing adjourned.