A former law firm owner who ignored the terms of a freezing order made against her has been sentenced to 12 months in prison. In Sahota & Anor v Newman, Mr Justice Adam Johnson said Dorota Newman had committed a serious contempt of court by failing to engage with legal proceedings for several months.

Newman had been required to provide information about all assets valued over £1,000 under the terms of a freezing order which had been applied for by solicitor Jay Sahota.

Sahota had sold Kent firm Jarmans Solicitors to Newman in 2013 but a dispute emerged over payments under the share purchase agreement.

After a default in payment by Newman, a mediation and settlement agreement was entered into in 2023 requiring her to pay a total of £300,000. But the defaults continued and by April 2024, £190,000 was outstanding: Sahota received a judgment in default and then applied for the freezing order.

The judge said there had then been a ‘continued lack of engagement’ from Newman, who is now believed to be living abroad. Attempts were made at personal service of the freezing order at addresses in London and Exeter, and Whatsapp messages – allowed as a method of service by the court – were ignored and the number blocked.

At a hearing earlier this year, Mr Justice Michael Green referred to the fact that attempts at personal service had been unsuccessful, and noted Newman’s practice of blocking the claimants’ solicitors WhatsApp messages. He added: 'It seems that the respondent is deliberately seeking to evade service.' The court then made an order dispensing with personal service.

Newman did not attend her first committal hearing and the matter was adjourned, with the second hearing continuing in her absence.

The judge found that Newman knew she was required to make disclosure of her assets under the freezing order and knew of her own failure to do so. ‘There is nothing to suggest that Ms Newman has been acting under pressure from others: her conduct is the product of her own free will,’ he added. ‘Her failure to take any part in the proceedings sets the context, and indicates that the breach is the result of a deliberate policy of non-engagement.’

In November, the High Court also found in favour of Sahota and his wife in their claim against Newman and ordered her to pay them £415,270 plus costs of £44,075.

Commenting on the contempt ruling, Akbar Ali of London firm Ali Legal Ltd, who represented the claimants, said: ‘This judgment marks an important step toward the resolution of a highly regrettable situation. The defendant appears to be deliberately evading responsibility and may perhaps be burying her head in the sand, to the detriment of all involved – not least herself.’

Jarmans was shut down by the Solicitors Regulation Authority last year on the basis of suspected dishonesty by Newman, who lists her occupation on Companies House as a fashion designer. She was made subject to an order earlier this year barring her from being involved in the legal profession, following an SRA finding that she authorised 18 improper transfers from the client to office account, and caused a shortage of around £3,700.