The court found breaches involving assets, bank statements and false statements
The High Court has found entrepreneur Oussama Ammar in contempt of court over breaches of freezing and disclosure orders, as well as false statements made in court documents.
His contempt proceedings will now move to a separate sentencing hearing. The court said all sentencing options remain open and that Mr Ammar is at risk of a significant custodial sentence.
The case, The Family (Holdings) Limited and others v Oussama Ammar and another [2026] EWHC 2433 (Comm), concerned a series of worldwide freezing and disclosure orders made during proceedings brought by companies associated with investments in start-up enterprises.
The claimants alleged that Mr Ammar had breached those orders by dealing with assets subject to the freezing injunction, failing to provide information and making false statements.
The court ultimately found contempt in relation to Grounds 1, 5, 6, 7 and 12, although only parts of some grounds were established.
Under Ground 1, the claimants established that Mr Ammar had diverted income from the ventures “Travel with Ouss” and “Better Call Ouss” towards his expenses. The court also found that he had incurred a €2,630.86 liability for a two-day stay at the Grand Hotel du Cap-Ferrat, which was not covered by the permitted exceptions to the freezing order.
Ground 5 concerned three withdrawals from a Mercury Bank account totalling $97,298.59, made without the seven days’ advance notice required by a December 2023 order. Mr Ammar accepted that the payments had been made without prior notice.
Under Ground 6, the court found repeated failures to provide bank statements as required. The judge noted that Mr Ammar had not provided the required statements from 30 October 2024 onwards, depriving the claimants of information about the continuing application of assets subject to the orders.
Ground 7 succeeded only in relation to Mr Ammar’s failure to disclose profit shares connected with “Better with Ouss” and “Mastermind Ikigai”. The court found that he had failed to disclose relevant profits in his December 2023 witness statement.
The court also found contempt under Ground 12 in relation to statements in Mr Ammar’s third affirmation concerning the use of a Solo Bank debit card and his claim that the account was used for his living expenses. The judge concluded that the statements were false, that Mr Ammar did not honestly believe them to be true and that they materially interfered with the administration of justice.
However, the court rejected Ground 11 and found substantial parts of Grounds 7 and 12, together with Ground 8, defective because the contempt application did not adequately set out the essential facts required by CPR 81.4(2)(h). The court refused the claimants’ application to rectify or amend those defects at this stage.
The sentencing hearing will take place separately, with Mr Ammar directed to attend in person. He has a right of appeal without permission, with the 21-day time limit running from the date sentence is pronounced.