The Court ordered indefinite committal to a correctional centre for a sole director who deliberately and dishonestly breached freezing orders by causing over $5.7 million to be withdrawn from frozen company accounts using false invoices, where the contempts remained unpurged and the contemnor led no evidence of inability to repay funds traced to him personally. The Court held that an indefinite term (terminable upon purging) rather than a fixed term was appropriate where the purpose was coercive and remedial rather than punitive, following Xiao, and that the contemnor could apply under SCR Pt 55 r 14 for discharge if he later demonstrated inability to purge. Indemnity costs were ordered against the contemnor and the corporate defendants for both the liability and penalty phases.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.