Episo 4 Pilgrim Holding SARL & Anor v Davies [2023] EWHC 2797 (Comm) (09 November 2023)

Episo 4 Pilgrim Holding SARL & Anor v Davies [2023] EWHC 2797 (Comm) (09 November 2023)

Although there is a strong prima facie case that Mr Davies knowingly made false statements with intent to mislead the court, the public interest does not require committal proceedings in this case, given the context, the correction of misstatements, the lack of prejudice beyond costs, and the disproportionate use of court resources.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2797 (Comm)
Parties
Applicant/defendant: EPISO 4 PILGRIM HOLDING SARL; Applicant/defendant: TRISTAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LLP; Respondent: TIMOTHY DAVIES; Claimant: TB PROPERTY INVESTMENTS (PLYMOUTH) LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application for Permission to Pursue Committal Proceedings / Application for Permission to Bring Committal Proceedings Under CPR 81.3(5)(b)
Outcome
Permission to pursue committal proceedings refused
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, False Statements, Security for Costs, Witness Evidence, Public Interest
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Committal for Contempt False Statements Security for Costs Witness Evidence Public Interest

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

Parties

EPISO 4 PILGRIM HOLDING SARL

Applicant/defendant

TRISTAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LLP

Applicant/defendant

TIMOTHY DAVIES

Respondent

TB PROPERTY INVESTMENTS (PLYMOUTH) LIMITED

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application for Permission to Pursue Committal Proceedings / Application for Permission to Bring Committal Proceedings Under CPR 81.3(5)(b)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a strong prima facie case that Mr Davies knowingly made false statements in witness statements verified by a statement of truth
  2. 2 Whether the false statements were made with the intention of interfering with the due administration of justice
  3. 3 Whether it is in the public interest to grant permission to pursue committal proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Although there is a strong prima facie case that Mr Davies knowingly made false statements with intent to mislead the court, the public interest does not require committal proceedings in this case, given the context, the correction of misstatements, the lack of prejudice beyond costs, and the disproportionate use of court resources.

Court Disposition

Permission to pursue committal proceedings refused

Orders

  • Permission to bring committal proceedings against Mr Davies is refused