Will Brett Wilson LLP Handle Its Own Winding Up Petition or be Struck Off for Overt Abuse of Process?

posted by Roy Schestowitz on Jul 16, 2025,
updated Jul 16, 2025

Last month: This Past Friday, Confirming What We Said All Along About Brett Wilson LLP: It's Shrinking, Has Considerable Debt, Loss of Net Assets Despite the Microsoft SLAPP Money

Also last month: UK High Court Blasts Brett Wilson LLP for Misusing "GDPR" After Failed Efforts to Censor Critics Using 'Libel' Claims

Today we sue not only the first Microsofter of Brett Wilson LLP [1, 2] - an absolutely terrible human being - but also the second one, the Serial Strangler from Microsoft. Based on public records (the court database for past and present court cases is public), Brett Wilson LLP has almost no business left. This year it's almost exclusively filling up forms for finishing off failed businesses. There's not so much money in doing that (we sometimes compare that to conveyance in terms of procedural steps and legal fees). To quote recent estimates:

Right now they depend a great deal on Microsoft money as they send many kilograms (yes, kilograms!) of legal papers our way. That's not going to last forever. Women left the firm very recently and they cannot really hire people. People who are suitably qualified and able would not want to represent such clients and oppress innocent women who were victimised.

Brett Wilson LLP made its own bed. One can say it became an informal "Microsoft partner". We already know how such partnerships always end up.

If it does not imminently get stuck off (as in, shut down), it'll run out of money. Who will do the petition to pay back its lenders? Who will buy the office chairs as souvenirs?

Even a "limited liability" has its limits. Remember that Sirius got sued some months ago. The shell game isn't an invulnerable shield, nor will the shell "Brett and Wilson" (with only 2 pounds in the bank; that's about 3 US dollars) protect them from liabilities.

This was published just less than a day ago:

This is what they have in the bank, based on their statement, which is publicly accessible to all:

Those "parked" assets are not there for any reasons other than 'gaming the system'. Many companies do this. But it works to the detriment of the general public and a properly-functioning legal system. █