Watts & Mantello (No 2)

This matter concerned an application by the applicant, Watts, for an order that the respondent, Mantello, be committed for contempt of court. The contempt alleged was that Mantello had breached an interlocutory injunction granted by the court on 16 March 2023, which restrained Mantello from dealing with or diminishing the value of certain assets. Watts alleged that Mantello had contravened this injunction by transferring a property to his wife and by failing to disclose the existence of a bank account.

The primary legal issue before Carew J was whether Mantello's actions constituted a wilful breach of the interlocutory injunction. This required the court to determine if Mantello had acted with the necessary intention to disobey the court's order, or if his conduct was reckless as to whether it would have that effect. The court also had to consider the appropriate penalty if contempt was found to have occurred.

Carew J found that Mantello had indeed wilfully breached the injunction. His Honour concluded that Mantello's transfer of the property was a deliberate attempt to place it beyond the reach of the court's orders, and that his failure to disclose the bank account was a further wilful contravention. The court reasoned that the purpose of an interlocutory injunction is to preserve the status quo, and that Mantello's actions were a direct affront to the court's authority and the administration of justice.

Consequently, Carew J ordered that Mantello be committed to prison for a period of three months, suspended on the condition that he comply with the terms of the original interlocutory injunction and pay the costs of the contempt application.