Scriven, Re
Non-service of the committal order, absence of judicial signature on the warrant, and failure to tender conduct money did not cause injustice or prejudice to Mr Scriven, who was aware of the proceedings and the reasons for his committal. The procedural defects were technical and did not warrant setting aside the committal or his imprisonment.
- Parties
- Appellant: Geoffrey Harold Scriven; Respondent: Official Receiver
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 June 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order for Contempt of Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Committal for Contempt, Service of Committal Orders, Bankruptcy Public Examination, Procedural Fairness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Geoffrey Harold Scriven
Appellant
Official Receiver
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order for Contempt of Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to serve the committal order on the contemnor invalidated the committal and imprisonment
- 2 Whether the warrant for committal required judicial signature to be valid
- 3 Whether the absence of conduct money invalidated the process
Ratio Decidendi
Non-service of the committal order, absence of judicial signature on the warrant, and failure to tender conduct money did not cause injustice or prejudice to Mr Scriven, who was aware of the proceedings and the reasons for his committal. The procedural defects were technical and did not warrant setting aside the committal or his imprisonment.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against the committal order is dismissed.
- No order for release or reduction of sentence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment