[2025] EWHC 2501 (Ch)

Fecha: 03-Sep-2025

GROUNDS 3 AND 4

GROUNDS 3 AND 4

62.

I have determined that Sanman needs permission to bring contempt proceedings in respect of grounds 3 and 4, but not ground 2 (see paragraph 22 above).

63.

Grounds 3 and 4 are both based upon the statement made in paragraph 10 of Mr Ginda’s affidavit of 12 November 2024 that “[TGDM’s] only asset worldwide exceeding £10,000 in value is £9,315,733 in [TGDM’s] bank account with Punjab National Bank”. This is said, by Sanman to be: (a) a false statement which Mr Ginda knew to be false (ground 3); and (b) a breach of paragraph 9 of the Freezing Order (ground 4).

64.

In considering whether to grant permission to bring contempt proceedings in respect of grounds 3 and 4, I will:

(a)

consider whether there is a strong prima facie case that the statement in paragraph 10 is false, if not I will refuse permission, for grounds 3 and 4;

(b)

consider whether there is a strong prima facie case that Mr Ginda knew that the statement was false, if not I will refuse permission, for grounds 3 and 4;

(c)

in relation to ground 4 only, consider whether there is a strong prima facie case that paragraph 9 of the Freezing Order has been breached, if not, I will refuse permission for ground 4;

(d)

consider whether Sanman has a strong prima facie case in relation to the other factors identified by Butcher J in Olympic Council of Asia relevant to a finding of contempt (see paragraph 26(a) above);

(e)

consider the public interest factors identified by Butcher J in Olympic Council of Asia (see paragraph 26(b) above);

(f)

consider the additional factors identified by Moore - Bick LJ in KJM Superbikes (see paragraph 26 (c) and (d) above);and

(g)

conclude, taking all those factors into account, whether to grant permission for Sanman to bring contempt proceedings on ground 3 and/or ground 4.