BL-2021-002235 - [2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch)

The respondent in his evidence and his correspondence to the court did not seek to challenge his knowledge of the 2022 order and its terms. Nor did he deny producing the documents which are attributed to him. What he did was to deny that he had been properly served, or indeed that he had been properly joined to the proceedings. Over and above that, he denied that what he had done amounted to a breach of the order. He relied mainly on the claim that there had been a fraud on the court in 2022, in that the order was obtained by virtue of false evidence by an officer of the applicant.