[1]Fleming: Wife loses appeal against suspended prison sentence
The wife of a Birmingham-based solicitor who harassed the executors of his £8m estate has lost her appeal against a suspended prison sentence for contempt.
Sophie Fleming, who was married to Brendan Fleming – described by His Honour Judge Tindall as “larger than life, perhaps one of the most recognisable and well-respected solicitors in Birmingham’s legal community for 40 years” – was sentenced to 28 days in jail in March this year, suspended for two years.
HHJ Tindal gave Ms Fleming the sentence [2] for contempt of court, after committing 27 breaches of two injunctions that aimed to stop her online harassment of the executors of Mr Fleming’s estate, three of whom are solicitors.
Her failed attempt to overturn the suspended sentence at the High Court on 18 June follows other unsuccessful efforts to remove the executors and bring separate probate proceedings.
Mr Fleming died aged 75 on New Year’s Eve 2023. His £8m estate included the Brendan Fleming Limited (BFL), a specialist family law firm based in Birmingham that was valued at £2.4m.
The first two executors were Rebecca Ward, a director at BFL, and Richard Wood, a financial adviser. Fiona Lawrence and Michelle Rose, both partners at Bristol law firm VWV, were appointed as interim administrators.
This led to Ms Fleming published vitriolic posts about the executors accusing them of fraud and corruption. She then extended her online campaign to HHJ Tindall. Despite various injunctions the harassment continued.
Weeks before the Court of Appeal hearing, Ms Fleming’s solicitors applied to come off the record saying they were “professionally embarrassed”.
Ms Fleming represented herself, via video link from an undisclosed location. It is known that Ms Fleming uses addresses in Turkey and Northern Ireland.
Lord Justice Arnold said: “It is clear from Ms Fleming’s own comments, both in response to her solicitors’ application to come off the record and during the hearing of her appeal, that she was unhappy with the manner in which her solicitors and counsel were pursuing the appeal and wished to advance arguments which they evidently did not consider they were professionally able to do.”
Ms Fleming said an executors’ order was unlawful and constituted an abuse of process, because it was “being used to silence allegations of fraud” relating to shares in BFL and the administration of the estate.
She said HHJ Tindall had failed to address her fraud allegations and had “mischaracterised lawful expression as harassment.”
And she claimed Tindall J failed to take into account how her conduct arose from “legitimate objections” to actions taken by the administrators, which “were in conflict with the interests of the minor heirs and were ultra vires.”
Ms Fleming has six children, and she claimed her legal challenges were being taken in their best interests.
The judges ruled [3] that Ms Fleming’s appeal was “untenable” and that “in spite of her oft-stated desire to protect her children’s inheritance, she has repeatedly behaved in a manner which is contrary to their interests”.
Her allegations of conspiracy and fraud “are baseless for the reasons which HHJ Tindal has explained more than once”, said LJ Arnold.
“In my view the judge’s reasoning on this question was unimpeachable. There was no procedural unfairness. For the reasons given above the appeal must be dismissed. I would certify that it was totally without merit.”
The court said it was clear from the evidence that Ms Fleming had deliberately decided not to attend the hearing before HHJ Tindall because she feared being sent to prison.
The judgment stated: “It is repugnant to the proper administration of justice that a contemnor can flout orders of the court, then absent himself from the committal hearing, then avoid serving whatever prison sentence is imposed and then finally avail himself of the procedures of the Court of Appeal, whilst enjoying the shelter of some safe haven overseas.”
The judges agreed that reform of this aspect of the law “is long overdue”.