Cole v Carpenter & Ors

Cole v Carpenter & Ors

Permission to bring contempt proceedings is refused because, although there is a strong prima facie case of knowing falsity, it is premature and contrary to the overriding objective to bring such proceedings before trial when the relevant issues will be explored at trial. The application is therefore dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Astrid-Caroline Cole; Defendant: Sean Avram Carpenter; Defendant: Lauren Sarah Carpenter; Defendant: David Aaron Carpenter
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil (contempt Application) / Application for Permission to Bring Contempt Proceedings (pre Trial)
Outcome
Application for permission to bring contempt proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Permission to Bring Contempt Proceedings, False Statements Verified by Statement of Truth, Public Interest in Contempt Applications, Abuse of Process, Without Prejudice Communications
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Permission to Bring Contempt Proceedings False Statements Verified by Statement of Truth Public Interest in Contempt Applications Abuse of Process Without Prejudice Communications

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Astrid-Caroline Cole

Claimant

Sean Avram Carpenter

Defendant

Lauren Sarah Carpenter

Defendant

David Aaron Carpenter

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contempt Application) / Application for Permission to Bring Contempt Proceedings (pre Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants should be granted permission to bring contempt proceedings against the Claimant for allegedly making a false statement verified by a statement of truth and falsifying evidence
  2. 2 Whether the application for permission is premature and contrary to the overriding objective
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants' conduct in threatening committal proceedings amounted to unambiguous impropriety

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to bring contempt proceedings is refused because, although there is a strong prima facie case of knowing falsity, it is premature and contrary to the overriding objective to bring such proceedings before trial when the relevant issues will be explored at trial. The application is therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to bring contempt proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to make a contempt application is dismissed