Corrigan v Chelsea Football Club Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1964 (19 November 2019)

Corrigan v Chelsea Football Club Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1964 (19 November 2019)

The appeal is dismissed because the defendant was repeatedly advised to seek legal advice, failed to engage with the court process, and did not demonstrate that his mental health issues or lack of representation justified non-compliance or setting aside the committal order. The judge exercised proper discretion in making and activating the committal order. Fresh evidence does not justify a different outcome and could have been adduced below.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Civ 1964
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Stephen Corrigan; Respondent / Claimant: Chelsea Football Club Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Committal Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Ticket Touting, Legal Representation in Committal Proceedings, Mental Health and Capacity, Injunctions, Breach of Court Orders
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Sports Law Committal for Contempt Ticket Touting Legal Representation in Committal Proceedings Mental Health and Capacity Injunctions +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Corrigan

Appellant / Defendant

Chelsea Football Club Limited

Respondent / Claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Committal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the committal order for contempt was properly made and activated
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's mental health and lack of legal representation justified setting aside the committal order
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence on appeal should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the defendant was repeatedly advised to seek legal advice, failed to engage with the court process, and did not demonstrate that his mental health issues or lack of representation justified non-compliance or setting aside the committal order. The judge exercised proper discretion in making and activating the committal order. Fresh evidence does not justify a different outcome and could have been adduced below.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application to adduce fresh evidence refused
  • Committal order and sentence confirmed