‘Inherently incredible’ – judge finds David Antrobus and Jack Mason to be in contempt of court

Two Manchester entrepreneurs behind Inc & Co have been found to be in contempt of court by breaching three freezing orders, the High Court in London has ruled.

Barclays Bank brought a civil case against Jack Mason and David Antrobus claiming they conspired to move assets offshore in breach of various freezing orders brought against them and their business associate Scott Dylan.

They face a further challenge from Barclays that £13.7m was taken from the bank without authorisation. Both Mason, the chief executive, and Antrobus, the chief technology officer of Inc & Co, claimed the asset transfers were done without their knowledge or consent.

In the Rolls Building at the Royal Courts of Justice Mr Justice Rajah said he found their evidence at different times to be “inherently incredible”, “strained credulity”, and contained “deliberate falsehoods”.

He said he was “satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that Mr Antrobus and Mr Mason breached..(various freezing orders) … by knowingly assisting or permitting” transfers of shares.

Barclays’ wider claim is that Dylan, Mason and Antrobus, and others, conspired to take assets to the value of £13.7m, for which they are subject to freezing orders. In defiance of those orders they transferred shares linked to Fresh Thinking Group, an independent capital investment group, now in liquidation, to two new entities set up in the offshore British Virgin Islands. 

Initially all three businessmen insisted the transfers were carried out by a Seychelles-based director “Rea Barreau” and that they were unaware of the transactions.

Yet in a dramatic about-turn after two days of the hearing Scott Dylan admitted to two breaches, which took his colleagues by surprise.

Dylan admitted that on or about 23 March 2022 he knowingly assisted in and/or permitted the breaches of freezing order by transferring shares to a British Virgin Islands company.

He also admitted to most of the “accepted facts” laid out in the Contempt Application against him with the express proviso that his acceptance is confined to the Contempt Application against him (including at any sentencing hearing) and will not be used or held against him for any other purpose.

The judge said he didn’t accept the explanation that the transfers were the work of “Rea Barreau”, nor that she was even appointed as a director of the businesses as was claimed.

The judge said both Antrobus and Mason “presented as competent, confident and able business people” and that “their evidence that they had naively and unquestioningly accepted important matters they were told by Mr Dylan or others, or signed important documents that were drafted for them by nameless people, strained credulity”.

After describing the unlikely scenario whereby directors of a company would have no contact “of any kind” with someone of the status “Rea Barreau” supposedly held, in a company subject to litigation and freezing orders, the judge went on to say: “There was no contact between them at all. This is very far removed from the real commercial world. It is inherently incredible.” 

On Mason’s evidence the Judge said: “I can be sure, and am sure, that Mr Mason’s various explanations about this alleged transfer of shares were deliberate falsehoods.”

Mason, Antrobus and Dylan will be sentenced for the contempt breach in October.

Mason, who lives in Barcelona, has been required to surrender his passport.

As previously reported on TheBusinessDesk.com, a court date of January 13, 2025, has been agreed for the full civil case brought by Barclays Bank against Dylan, Gareth Dylan, Dave Antrobus, plus Sally Ann Glover, a relative of one of the other defendants, over £13.7m it claims they took from the bank without authorisation and for their “personal enrichment”.

A second claim is brought against Fresh Thinking Group (now known as Old3 Limited), Mason and Inc Travel Group Limited (now known as Old2 Limited) which are both now in compulsory liquidation.

Barclays’ case is that all the individual defendants were also involved in a conspiracy to cause damage to Barclays by unlawful means. The defendants deny the conspiracy allegation and are contesting the claims made by Barclays.

The claims arise from the transfer, by subsidiaries of Fresh Thinking Group, of some £13.7m from accounts held with Barclays which, at the time, had no or no material credit balance. 

Barclays says that there were some 830 payments of amounts just below the £50,000 threshold that would have caused the payment requests to have been referred for further approval.

Barclays says that the money went to Fresh Thinking Group and one of its other subsidiaries, FT Ops Limited before onward disbursement and the “personal enrichment” of the defendants.

Important footnote: Fresh Thinking Group (now known as Old3 Limited) is in no way connected to Fresh Thinking Capital, a specialist lender, and Fresh Thinking Advisory which provides whole market corporate debt advisory.