Kimyani & Ors v Sandhu [2017] EWHC 1302 (Ch) (17 May 2017)

Kimyani & Ors v Sandhu [2017] EWHC 1302 (Ch) (17 May 2017)

Mrs. Sandhu deliberately and repeatedly breached the court's order for disclosure of assets and information, provided false and misleading affidavits, and failed to comply even after being given opportunities. The seriousness and persistence of the contempt, combined with the lack of genuine contrition or adequate mitigation, required an immediate custodial sentence.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1302 (Ch)
Parties
Applicant: Sukhvinder Kimyani; Applicant: Narinder Purdie; Applicant: Nimmi Rattu; Respondent: Devinder Sandhu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Committal Application in Civil Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing on Committal for Contempt
Outcome
Immediate custodial sentence for contempt of court
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Freezing Injunctions, Disclosure Orders, Breach of Court Orders, Sentencing for Contempt
Civil Procedure Equity and Trusts Family Law Committal for Contempt Freezing Injunctions Disclosure Orders Breach of Court Orders Sentencing for Contempt

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

Parties

Sukhvinder Kimyani

Applicant

Narinder Purdie

Applicant

Nimmi Rattu

Applicant

Devinder Sandhu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Committal Application in Civil Proceedings / Judgment After Hearing on Committal for Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs. Sandhu breached the terms of a court order requiring disclosure of assets and information regarding proceeds of sale
  2. 2 Whether the breach was deliberate and serious enough to warrant immediate imprisonment
  3. 3 Whether any mitigation (including medical evidence) justified a lesser or suspended sentence

Ratio Decidendi

Mrs. Sandhu deliberately and repeatedly breached the court's order for disclosure of assets and information, provided false and misleading affidavits, and failed to comply even after being given opportunities. The seriousness and persistence of the contempt, combined with the lack of genuine contrition or adequate mitigation, required an immediate custodial sentence.

Court Disposition

Immediate custodial sentence for contempt of court

Orders

  • Mrs. Sandhu is committed to prison for 12 months for contempt of court, with the possibility of reduction by up to six months upon full and prompt compliance with the court's order and cooperation with the claimants regarding the proceeds of sale.
  • Mrs. Sandhu will be entitled to unconditional release after serving half of her sentence pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act 2003.