Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Contempt of Court
AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE: DRAFT JUDGMENTS ARE SACROSANCT: ALLEGATIONS OF DISCLOSURE, AND OF "JUDGE'S OFFICE" LEAKING LIKE A SIEVE WERE TOTALLY MISFOUNDED

AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE: DRAFT JUDGMENTS ARE SACROSANCT: ALLEGATIONS OF DISCLOSURE, AND OF “JUDGE’S OFFICE” LEAKING LIKE A SIEVE WERE TOTALLY MISFOUNDED

October 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications

The judgment in Optis Cellular Technology Inc & Anor v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2694 (Pat) is one of the most extraordinary I have read. It concerns the important principle that draft judgments sent out by…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: 76 YEAR OLD CLAIMANT SENTENCED TO 6 MONTHS IMMEDIATE IMPRISONMENT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: 76 YEAR OLD CLAIMANT SENTENCED TO 6 MONTHS IMMEDIATE IMPRISONMENT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

July 14, 2021 · by gexall · in Committal proceedings, Fundamental Dishonesty

In One Insurance -v- Beasley (a judgment available here) a 76 year old was sentenced to six months immediate imprisonment following his dishonest pursuit of a personal injury case. “A wheelchair was hired on two occasions in order to be…

REMOTE HEARINGS THE SOLICITOR'S DUTIES: (1) READ THE ORDERS MADE; (2)  DO NOT BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT

REMOTE HEARINGS THE SOLICITOR’S DUTIES: (1) READ THE ORDERS MADE; (2) DO NOT BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT

August 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Coronavirus, Remote hearings

In the judgment today in Gubarev & Anor v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2167 (QB) the Divisional Court sent out a clear message that lawyers must follow orders of the court.  Live trials cannot be transmitted…

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH (3): THE SCARY STUFF (THE REALLY SCARY STUFF)

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH (3): THE SCARY STUFF (THE REALLY SCARY STUFF)

February 17, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

This is the third (and final) post in the series that examines the importance of the statement of truth.  Here we look at the clear and start warnings given by the courts about the importance of the statement of truth….

CIVIL CONTEMPT: THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM:  THE DANGERS OF NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE

CIVIL CONTEMPT: THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM: THE DANGERS OF NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE

September 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure

In January this year I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure.  It is as…

WHY THE LYING LITIGANT SHOULD FRET: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONTEMPT: WHEN FACEBOOK FLATLY CONTRADICTS PART 18 REPLIES

WHY THE LYING LITIGANT SHOULD FRET: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONTEMPT: WHEN FACEBOOK FLATLY CONTRADICTS PART 18 REPLIES

May 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In  Zurich Insurance Plc v Romaine [2019] EWCA Civ 851 allowed an appeal by an insurer so that an application for committal for contempt of court can proceed.  No substantive findings of fact have been made. The judgment shows that…

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts

In  Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 the Court of Appeal set out clear guidance for courts considering sentencing in  cases relating to reckless contempt on the part of expert witnesses.  A “reckless” statement made…

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

October 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts

In Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found a solicitor and a doctor in contempt of court.   The solicitor was imprisoned for 12 months, the doctor given a six month sentence,…

PROVING THINGS 107: PROVING A "STAGED CRASH" TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: CCTV EVIDENCE PROVIDES CONVINCING EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 107: PROVING A “STAGED CRASH” TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: CCTV EVIDENCE PROVIDES CONVINCING EVIDENCE

May 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Witness statements

In Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nazir & Anor [2018] EWHC 1296 (QB) His Honour Judge Gosnell (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) found the two defendants in contempt of court when they had taken part in a staged crash and…

LIES, DAMN LIES AND CAR HIRE QUOTES: COMPUTER RECORDS, AND INTERNAL DOCUMENTS PREFERRED TO WITNESS EVIDENCE

LIES, DAMN LIES AND CAR HIRE QUOTES: COMPUTER RECORDS, AND INTERNAL DOCUMENTS PREFERRED TO WITNESS EVIDENCE

May 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Disclosure, Witness statements

The judgment in Accident Exchange Limited -v- Broom [2017] EWHC 1096 (Admin) shows a deliberate, and concerted, effort to undermine the civil justice process. It also shows the importance of obtaining computer records, and internal documentation when preparing a trial….

WITNESS STATEMENTS, STATEMENTS OF TRUTH AND CONTEMPT OF COURT

December 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Slade in Aviva Insurance -v- Randive [2016] EWHC 3152 (QB) involves no findings of fact.  However it does demonstrate the dangers inherent in being involved in the drafting of witness statements and replies to Part…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: DOES IT NEED "BEEFING UP": THE POLICE SAY WITNESSES DON'T UNDERSTAND IT'S SIGNIFICANCE!

August 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Uncategorized

The statement of truth is central to modern litigation, and at every stage of the litigation.  However it is worthwhile considering whether, in its current form, it is effective. THE ACCIDENT EXCHANGE CASE It is worthwhile reading the judgment in…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Uncategorized

The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…

"TAKING THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH LIGHTLY": CONTEMPT OF COURT WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE "CREATED" LONG AFTER THE EVENT

May 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Statements of Case

In GB Holdings Ltd -v- Short [2015] EWHC 1378 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson reviewed the authorities and principles relating to applications for contempt of court when it is alleged that a witness has forged documents in relation to the action….

UNILATERAL DECISIONS TO VARY ORDERS WILL LEAD TO TROUBLE AND AMOUNT TO CONTEMPT: PARATUS AMC EXAMINED

June 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

The case of Paratus AMC Ltd -v- Lewis [2014] EWHC 1577 (Ch) has been placed on Bailli following an order by the judge to highlight an issue of contempt of court. As such it clearly requires wider publication. It also…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 31,358 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
  • PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • COSTS BITES 73: IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO GET PAST THE FIRST STAGE

Top Posts & Pages

  • CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
  • "WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS"
  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin