Green & Ors v Hurst

Green & Ors v Hurst

There is not a strong prima facie case that the claimants knowingly made false statements in their witness statements. The evidence relied on is weak, based on recollection of a conversation years after the events, and does not support deliberate dishonesty. Even if there were a strong case, committal proceedings would not be proportionate or in the public interest, given the lack of materiality to the outcome, prior judicial findings, and the applicant's motives.

Parties
Claimant: Evelyn Green; Claimant: David Robert Green; Claimant: Ian Mablin; Defendant: Robert Alfred Hurst
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Bring Committal Proceedings (contempt of Court) / Ruling on Application for Permission
Outcome
permission to bring committal proceedings refused
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, False Statements, Public Interest, Proportionality, Bankruptcy Annulment
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal Proceedings False Statements Public Interest Proportionality Bankruptcy Annulment

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evelyn Green

Claimant

David Robert Green

Claimant

Ian Mablin

Claimant

Robert Alfred Hurst

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Bring Committal Proceedings (contempt of Court) / Ruling on Application for Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants knowingly made false statements in witness statements verified by statement of truth
  2. 2 Whether there is a strong prima facie case for contempt of court
  3. 3 Whether committal proceedings would be proportionate and in the public interest

Ratio Decidendi

There is not a strong prima facie case that the claimants knowingly made false statements in their witness statements. The evidence relied on is weak, based on recollection of a conversation years after the events, and does not support deliberate dishonesty. Even if there were a strong case, committal proceedings would not be proportionate or in the public interest, given the lack of materiality to the outcome, prior judicial findings, and the applicant's motives.

Court Disposition

permission to bring committal proceedings refused