Wright v McCormack [2023] EWHC 1030 (KB) (05 April 2023)

Wright v McCormack [2023] EWHC 1030 (KB) (05 April 2023)

The Ontier report is admissible as evidence against Dr Wright, as it was submitted by his solicitors acting with ostensible authority and relied upon in proceedings; Dr Wright has a case to answer for contempt based on prima facie evidence of breach of judgment embargo; however, due to complexity, disputed facts, and proportionality, it is not in the public interest to pursue contempt proceedings further.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1030 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Craig Wright; Defendant: Peter McCormack
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application (court's Own Initiative) / Third Hearing; Determination of Admissibility, Case to Answer, and Next Steps
Outcome
Summons discharged; proceedings ended.
Legal Topics
Judgment Embargo, Admissibility of Evidence, Legal Professional Privilege, Right to Silence, Self Incrimination, Authority of Legal Representatives
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Media Law Judgment Embargo Admissibility of Evidence Legal Professional Privilege Right to Silence Self Incrimination +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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Wright

Claimant

Peter McCormack

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application (court's Own Initiative) / Third Hearing; Determination of Admissibility, Case to Answer, and Next Steps

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of Ontier report as evidence
  2. 2 Whether Dr Wright has a case to answer for contempt
  3. 3 Waiver of privilege by Dr Wright

Ratio Decidendi

The Ontier report is admissible as evidence against Dr Wright, as it was submitted by his solicitors acting with ostensible authority and relied upon in proceedings; Dr Wright has a case to answer for contempt based on prima facie evidence of breach of judgment embargo; however, due to complexity, disputed facts, and proportionality, it is not in the public interest to pursue contempt proceedings further.

Court Disposition

Summons discharged; proceedings ended.

Orders

  • No referral to Attorney General; no further contempt proceedings.
  • No direction on costs; provisional view that costs incurred in considering material not recoverable.