KHALID & KHALID

This matter concerned an application by the applicant, Khalid & Khalid, for an order that the respondent, Mr. A. Khalid, be committed for contempt of court. The applicant sought this order on the basis that Mr. Khalid had breached an interlocutory injunction granted by the court on 15 March 2023, which restrained him from dealing with or diminishing the value of certain assets. The dispute arose in the context of ongoing family law proceedings between the parties.

The primary legal issue before Gill J was whether Mr. Khalid's conduct constituted a wilful breach of the interlocutory injunction. Specifically, the court was required to determine if Mr. Khalid had, with knowledge of the injunction, acted in a manner that contravened its terms, thereby demonstrating an intention to disobey the court's order. This involved an assessment of the evidence presented by the applicant regarding alleged dealings with the restrained assets.

Gill J found that the applicant had not discharged the onus of proving, beyond reasonable doubt, that Mr. Khalid had wilfully breached the injunction. While acknowledging that some actions taken by Mr. Khalid might have been ill-advised or potentially detrimental to the applicant's interests, the evidence did not establish the necessary intent to disobey the court's order. The judge applied the principles governing contempt of court, which require a high degree of certainty regarding the wilful disobedience of a clear and unambiguous court order. Consequently, the application for committal was dismissed.