![[2025] EWHC 2501 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png){kind=logo}
Is Sanman a Proper Person to bring the Contempt proceedings?
Is Sanman a Proper Person to bring the Contempt proceedings?
This is the first of the additional points made by Moore-Bick LJ in KJM Superbikes(see paragraph 26 (c) above).
It seems to me that, having found that I am not satisfied that Sanman has any illegitimate “prosecutorial motive” for bringing contempt proceedings against the Respondents and because Sanman is the only party who it appears could, or would bring such proceedings, Sanman would be an appropriate party to bring the contempt proceedings.
- Heading
- INTRODUCTION
- THE PERMISSION APPLIED FOR
- EVIDENCE
- THE NEED FOR PERMISSION
- “It has been emphasised that the court should exercise great caution before giving permission to bring proceedings [and] should not do so unless there is a strong case both that the statement in quest
- APPLYING THE LEGAL PRINCIPLES TO THE GROUNDS
- Significance of and use to which the Statement was put/motive
- THE PUBLIC INTEREST
- Prosecutorial Motive
- Would contempt proceedings justify the court’s and other resources which would be devoted to them?/Proportionality
- Furthering the Overriding Objective
- Likely Penalty
- Is Sanman a Proper Person to bring the Contempt proceedings?
- The Need for Great Caution
- GROUNDS 3 AND 4
- Does Sanman have a Strong Prima Facie Case that the statement is false?
- Does Sanman have a Strong Prima Facie Case that Mr Ginda knew the Statement to be untrue?
- The significance of the false statement, use to which it was put and Mr Ginda’s motive
- Conclusions