Former Inc & Co leaders sentenced to 22 months for flouting court orders.
- Executives accused of unlawfully extracting £13.7m from Barclays accounts.
- Court finds deliberate breach of asset-freezing orders and extensive dishonesty.
- Funds allegedly used for personal benefits, including luxury expenses.
- Executives face further legal actions and ongoing disqualification pursuits.
Key figures from the former Inc & Co group have been handed 22-month jail terms following a severe violation of court orders related to Barclays Bank. The trio, Scott Dylan, David Antrobus, and Jack Mason, were implicated in extracting £13.7 million from Barclays accounts in a case highlighting significant legal infractions. The court found that they had engaged in a calculated conspiracy to misappropriate funds, benefitting personally and disregarding freezing orders.
The accusations levelled against these business leaders include the unlawful appropriation of money through automated decision-making processes. Funds were reportedly directed towards personal expenditures, such as a costly holiday on a private jet and the purchase of a hotel in Turkey. These actions were allegedly carried out with blatant disregard for legal obligations imposed through asset-freezing orders.
The court’s findings reveal a sophisticated attempt to conceal activities that contravened legal restrictions. Mr Justice Rajah highlighted the extensive deceit employed by the individuals, who orchestrated a narrative of misinformation to cover their tracks. Despite Dylan admitting to contempt, his counterparts Antrobus and Mason maintained a stance of denial, leading to a comprehensive trial that corroborated multiple contempts of court.
In the wake of these events, the Insolvency Service is pursuing disqualification actions against Dylan, now in custody, while warrants have been issued for Mason and Antrobus, reportedly located overseas. Furthermore, past reports accuse these individuals of insufficient cooperation following company failures, amassing significant financial obligations to creditors. In defence, Dylan claimed his actions were intended to safeguard employment, while Mason expressed aspirations for future business ventures.
This case underscores a significant breach of trust and legal norms by the accused parties, with implications stretching across various sectors and business interests previously under the Inc & Co umbrella.
The prison terms of Inc & Co’s former executives mark a profound instance of legal defiance with lasting repercussions.
