ET v ST

Permission for committal proceedings for contempt based on perjury and false witness statement is refused; perjury should be prosecuted through criminal proceedings, not family court committal applications. Costs for enforcement application awarded on indemnity basis; costs for committal application awarded at 50% on standard basis.

Parties: Applicant: ET; Respondent: ST
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 13 April 2018
Procedural Posture: Family / Judgment on Enforcement and Committal Applications
Outcome: Permission for committal proceedings refused; costs awarded as specified.
Legal Topics: Enforcement of Consent Orders, Contempt of Court, Perjury, Costs

Family Law Civil Procedure Enforcement of Consent Orders Contempt of Court Perjury Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2

Parties

Applicant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Judgment on Enforcement and Committal Applications

Legal Issues

1 Whether permission should be granted for committal proceedings for contempt based on false witness statement and lies on oath
2 Appropriate route for prosecution of perjury in family proceedings
3 Entitlement to costs for enforcement and committal applications

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Permission for committal proceedings refused; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

Applicant to recover costs of enforcement application on indemnity basis.
Applicant to recover 50% of costs of committal application on standard basis.