Lady Hiroko Barclay v Sir Frederick Barclay
[2023] EWFC 164
Lady Hiroko Barclay v Sir Frederick Hugh Barclay
28 March 2023
[2023] EWHC 1179 (Fam)
High Court
A rich man didn't pay his ex-wife what the court ordered. He says his nephews are blocking his money. The court wants to question the nephews to see if this is true. The nephews tried to stop the questioning, but the court said no, it's important to find out the truth.
Key Facts
- •Howard and Aidan Barclay (nephews of Sir David Barclay) applied to set aside witness summonses.
- •Sir Frederick Barclay (brother of deceased Sir David) has not paid a £100 million lump sum ordered by the court.
- •Sir Frederick claims lack of access to funds due to funds being withheld by the Barclay group of businesses (75% owned and managed by the applicants).
- •The court previously found Sir Frederick in contempt for non-payment.
- •A potential settlement was near completion but fell through.
- •Witness summonses were issued to ascertain Sir Frederick's means.
Legal Principles
The High Court may summon witnesses to prove a debtor's means.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, rule 33.17(1)
The court may make a new order for payment of the amount due under the original order on the hearing of a judgment summons.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, rule 33.16(1)(a)
The court has a general power to summon a witness at any stage to give evidence.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, rule 24.2
Outcomes
The application to set aside the witness summonses was dismissed.
The court's powers are not limited as argued by the applicants; the court retains the power to recalibrate the order and summon witnesses at any stage of the proceedings, including after a finding of contempt. The evidence of the nephews is potentially material to determining whether to recalibrate the order or determine punishment.
Lady Barclay was given permission to amend the summons to include rules 33.16 and/or 24.2.
To clarify the legal basis for the summons.
The hearing was adjourned.
Due to the applicants' unavailability.
Similar Cases
MA v ROUX
[2024] EWHC 1917 (Fam)
Bakhtiar Abbasi, R (on the application of) v The Crown Court at Southwark
[2024] EWHC 1781 (Admin)
The Incorporated Trustees of Great Calling Ministries Worldwide v Auguster Omonigho Irabor & Anor
[2024] EWHC 803 (Fam)
John Riordan & Ors v Moon Beever Solicitors
[2023] EWHC 659 (SCCO)