Graham Darby v Zi Wang

On an appeal against imprisonment for civil contempt, the appellate court may take account of belated compliance with court orders and an apology when reviewing the sanction. Those developments may justify reducing imprisonment to the equivalent of time served. Where a contemnor facing imprisonment engages with the process at a late stage, is unrepresented and has tried to obtain lawyers, a short adjournment may be appropriate to secure legal representation and promote compliance.

Mr Graham Darby appealed from an order made by His Honour Judge Keyser KC, sitting as a High Court judge in the Circuit Commercial Court, committing him to 18 months’ imprisonment for contempt. The contempt consisted of failing to disclose 100 Bitcoin under a freezing order and making a false statement about the disclosure. At the sanctions hearing he was unrepresented, although he had tried to obtain solicitors. The appeal concerned representation, suspension, length of sentence, and the effect of later compliance, an apology and psychiatric evidence. A subsequent settlement meant that the appeal was no longer opposed, and the central question became whether the sanction should be reduced to time served.

1. Disposition. The appeal was allowed. In light of Mr Darby’s belated compliance with the court’s orders and his apology, the sanction was reduced to a committal to prison for time served.
2. Mr Darby had served 146 days. The court treated that as equivalent to a sentence of 292 days, being a period of more than nine months. The appeal was therefore allowed to that extent, without determining the other grounds concerning adjournment, suspension and the original length of sentence.
3. Legal representation. The court nevertheless gave guidance on the adjournment issue. Where a person faces committal to prison for contempt, belatedly engages with the process, is unrepresented and says that efforts have been made to obtain lawyers, there are many reasons to grant a short adjournment to secure representation. This promotes fairness and may assist the contemnor to purge the contempt and comply with the orders. The point was supported by Haringey London Borough Council v Brown [2015] EWCA Civ 483; [2017] 1 WLR 542, but was not necessary to the disposal of this appeal.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division) — Appeal allowed on the basis of belated compliance and apology. The committal sanction was reduced to time served. An earlier order had released Mr Darby on bail pending determination of the appeal.
2. High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts in Wales, Circuit Commercial Court — On 24 July 2024, His Honour Judge Keyser KC committed Mr Darby to 18 months’ imprisonment for contempt.