header-logo header-logo

Practice

17 November 2011
Issue: 7490 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

JSC BTA Bank v Solodchenko and others [2011] EWCA Civ 1241, [2011] All ER (D) 56 (Nov)

 

In the consideration of sentencing for civil contempt, when such contempt consisted of non-compliance with the disclosure provisions of a freezing order, the following propositions applied:

(i) freezing orders were made for good reason and in order to prevent the dissipation or spiriting away of assets. Any substantial breach of such an order was a serious matter which merited condign punishment;

(ii) condign punishment for such contempt normally meant a prison sentence, however, there might be circumstances in which a substantial fine was sufficient; and

(iii) where there was a continuing failure to disclose relevant information, the court had to consider imposing a long sentence, possibly even the maximum of two years, to encourage future co-operation by the contemnor. In the case of continuing breach, out of fairness to the contemnor, the court might see fit to indicate, first, what portion of the sentence should be served in any event as punishment for past breaches and, second, what portion of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll