Businessman’s alleged media leak could spark court proceedings

Wednesday 18 July 2018

Royal Court officials are considering whether to take action against a businessman believed to have leaked confidential court documents about his elderly mother’s battle with a Jersey trust company to the media.

South African magazine Noseweek, which has the tagline “news you’re not supposed to know”, published an article in May detailing 83-year-old Dorothy Brakspear’s legal fight for compensation worth millions from Nedgroup Trust.

Acting without a lawyer, the widow argued that the trust group’s left the whole family out of pocket.

Mrs Brakspear’s key allegation was that the senior staff had conspired to rob her son, Ian Brakspear, of a Cape Town-based wine farm using falsified documents including a ‘fake’ loan of £500,000. The land at the centre of the case was later bought by designer fashion mogul Johan Rupert -  the owner of the multi-billion luxury holdings group Richemont, which is responsible for brands including Chloé, Cartier and Azzedine Alaia.

Pictured: The Royal Court case centred around a wine farm.

Nedbank strongly denied all of the claims. Represented by Advocate Mark Taylor, they succeeded in convincing the Court last week that the case should be struck out because it had already been through the South African judicial system, which found against the Brakspears.

But while the case rumbled through the Royal Court in recent months, articles about the case appeared in investigative magazine Noseweek.

One of those, published in May, contained specific references to evidence disclosed by Nedbank, which the court ordered should be kept confidential unless permission is granted for them to be used for any other purpose.

“No application has been made for the use of this material in the publication in Noseweek,” Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith, who heard the case with Jurats Grime and Thomas, recalled in his judgement.

Nedgroup Director Christopher John Roscouet said that Mrs Brakspear should have been “well aware of the limitations of the order” because she had asked about it in an email to the Judicial Greffier in April, who responded within two days.

Commissioner Clyde-Smith commented that her son was the most likely cause of the leak. 

He was reported to have already been connected to the publication through previous articles on the South African court proceedings. Mrs Brakspear also said that he had helped her draft her submissions to the court, including her sworn affadavit.

“Bearing in mind Mr Brakspear’s association with Noseweek referred to in the [South African judgment], his residence in South Africa and his leading role in this matter on behalf of his mother… it seems reasonable to suppose that he is orchestrating the dissemination of information,” the Commissioner concluded.

Mr Brakspear has now been ordered to provide a written statement on “what information he, or to his knowledge the other plaintiffs, have provided to Noseweek and any other third party that includes or makes reference to the Bankers’ Book evidence.”

The Commissioner said that the court would then consider whether the alleged breach needs to be “taken further.”

If so, Mr Brakspear, who is based in South Africa, may have to attend a court hearing.