McPhail v Dargie 11-Oct-2006 [2006] JRC 142 (11 October 2006)

The defendant is not in contempt of court as there was no specific deadline for filing the affidavit and the burden of proof for contempt was not met. The contempt application was disproportionate and amounted to an abuse of process, warranting indemnity costs against the plaintiff. No order as to costs is made regarding the main action.

Citation: [2006] JRC 142
Parties: Plaintiff: Mr McPhail; Defendant: Ms Dargie
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 11 October 2006
Procedural Posture: Civil / Post Hearing Judgment
Outcome: Application for committal for contempt dismissed. Order of Justice dismissed.
Legal Topics: Contempt of Court, Costs, Employment Dispute, Return of Property

Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Costs Employment Dispute Return of Property

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mr McPhail

Plaintiff

Ms Dargie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Hearing Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendant is guilty of contempt of court for failing to file an affidavit within the proper time
2 Whether any contempt has been purged by late filing
3 Who should bear the costs of the contempt application and the action itself

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for committal for contempt dismissed. Order of Justice dismissed.

Orders

Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs of the contempt application on an indemnity basis.
No order as to costs for the main action.