Neil & Anor v Henderson (Rev 1)

Neil & Anor v Henderson (Rev 1)

Ms Henderson forged the September documents and the disputed Borkova statement, knowingly deployed them in court proceedings, and intended to interfere with the administration of justice. The acts of contempt alleged in grounds 3, 4, 5, and 6 are proved beyond reasonable doubt; grounds 1, 2, and 7 are not proved.

Parties
Claimant: Terry John Neil; Claimant: Anthony Wright Hall; Defendant: Soraya Jasmine Henderson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Committal for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Sanction Reserved
Outcome
Defendant found guilty of contempt of court on grounds 3, 4, 5, and 6; not guilty on grounds 1, 2, and 7. Sanction to be determined at a later hearing.
Legal Topics
Forgery, False Witness Statements, Interference With Administration of Justice, Deployment of Forged Documents, Standard of Proof in Contempt Proceedings
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Forgery False Witness Statements Interference With Administration of Justice Deployment of Forged Documents Standard of Proof in Contempt 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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terry John Neil

Claimant

Anthony Wright Hall

Claimant

Soraya Jasmine Henderson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Committal for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Sanction Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant forged documents and witness statements for use in court proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the deployment of forged documents and false witness statements constituted contempt of court
  3. 3 Whether the defendant intended to interfere with the administration of justice

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Henderson forged the September documents and the disputed Borkova statement, knowingly deployed them in court proceedings, and intended to interfere with the administration of justice. The acts of contempt alleged in grounds 3, 4, 5, and 6 are proved beyond reasonable doubt; grounds 1, 2, and 7 are not proved.

Court Disposition

Defendant found guilty of contempt of court on grounds 3, 4, 5, and 6; not guilty on grounds 1, 2, and 7. Sanction to be determined at a later hearing.

Orders

  • Further hearing to determine appropriate sanction for contempt.