Ex-law firm owner jailed for contempt of court after refusing to comply with freezing order
Dorota Kazimiera Newman, the former owner of a defunct law firm, has been sentenced to 12 months in jail for contempt of court after failing to comply with a freezing order related to a £415,270 debt. The High Court ruling comes after Ms Newman, who took over Jarmans Solicitors in Sittingbourne, Kent, in 2022, repeatedly ignored court orders and refused to engage with proceedings.
The case stems from an application by Jay Singh Sahota and his wife, Joti Kaur Sahota, who sought to recover £346,000 from Ms Newman after taking over the firm. After judgment in default was entered against her in November 2024, the sum owed was later raised to £415,270, including costs. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) closed Jarmans Solicitors in March 2024 due to concerns of dishonesty and financial misconduct by Ms Newman, including improper transfers from client accounts.
In February 2025, the Sahotas obtained an interim freezing injunction against Ms Newman’s assets, including properties in London and Exeter. Despite the injunction, Ms Newman failed to provide any information regarding her assets as required by the court, leading to the contempt application. Efforts to serve her with notices were unsuccessful, as she blocked the Sahotas’ solicitors’ WhatsApp messages and evaded service attempts.
Embed from Getty Images
The case reached a critical point when the High Court convened in November 2025 to address her non-compliance. Despite efforts to locate Ms Newman, she did not attend the hearing, and Mr Justice Adam Johnson decided to proceed with the hearing in her absence, citing her deliberate refusal to engage with the process. In his judgment, Justice Johnson described her actions as a serious contempt and emphasized the high degree of culpability, noting her failure to offer any explanation or apology.
Ms Newman’s conduct, the judge concluded, showed a clear disregard for the legal process, and her failure to comply with the freezing order demonstrated a deliberate effort to frustrate the claims of the Sahotas. The judge also pointed out that Ms Newman’s actions were not the result of ignorance, given her commercial background in acquiring a solicitor’s firm. He highlighted that half of her 12-month sentence was intended to reflect the seriousness of the contempt, while the other half sought to encourage her future compliance with the court’s orders.
While the ruling marks a victory for the Sahotas, their solicitor Akbar Ali from Ali Legal, described the case as a “bitter-sweet” outcome. He acknowledged the gravity of sending someone to jail for a commercial dispute but expressed relief that the defendant’s actions were being met with a real consequence. Ali further emphasized that the financial and emotional toll on the Sahotas was significant and that the judgment should serve as a deterrent to others who may disregard court orders