Rottmann v Brittain

Rottmann v Brittain

The privilege against self-incrimination does not protect against use of compelled answers in foreign criminal proceedings; the judge exercised his discretion properly by ordering a private examination with transcript controls, which sufficiently protects the bankrupt's rights under English law and the ECHR. The application for permission to appeal is dismissed as hopeless.

Parties
Appellant: Michael Rottmann; Respondent: Brittain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (bankruptcy) / Application for Permission to Appeal From Order for Private Examination in Bankruptcy
Outcome
application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Privilege Against Self Incrimination, Public Vs Private Examination, European Convention on Human Rights Article 6, Use of Compelled Evidence in Foreign Criminal Proceedings
Bankruptcy Human Rights Civil Procedure Privilege Against Self Incrimination Public Vs Private Examination European Convention on Human Rights Article 6 Use of Compelled Evidence in Foreign Criminal Proceedings

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Rottmann

Appellant

Brittain

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (bankruptcy) / Application for Permission to Appeal From Order for Private Examination in Bankruptcy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether continuance of public examination in bankruptcy would prejudice a fair trial of criminal proceedings in Germany against the bankrupt
  2. 2 Whether the privilege against self-incrimination applies to foreign criminal proceedings in English bankruptcy examinations
  3. 3 Whether the order for private examination sufficiently protects the bankrupt's Article 6 ECHR rights

Ratio Decidendi

The privilege against self-incrimination does not protect against use of compelled answers in foreign criminal proceedings; the judge exercised his discretion properly by ordering a private examination with transcript controls, which sufficiently protects the bankrupt's rights under English law and the ECHR. The application for permission to appeal is dismissed as hopeless.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • Order for private examination before High Court judge stands