[Closed] representation without a statement of truth
If a defendant makes a written representation with false information on it to mislead the court but intentionally does not enclose a proper statement of truth in this written representation in case we discover the false information to avoid contempt of court, can this defendant nevertheless be prosecuted for contempt?
And, if if cannot be prosecuted is it not an easy way to mislead the court with false information without risking any prosecution for contempt?
I would like to know if this written representation is attached to an application notice with a statement of truth does this means that this statement of truth applies also to any written representation attached to this appication notice to avoid that the defendant escape prosecution for contempt of court in case he send false information to the Court in documents attached to the application notice?
Moreover I would like to know which standard of proof applies to contempt in a civil court the criminal standard of proof or the civil one?
Gordon Exall has written about this a lot in his excellent Civil Litigation Brief blog. For example:
I quote the following passage from the case you put forward
“the burden of proof lies on the person seeking committal; and a defendant is not obliged to give evidence and this is a matter of which he should be warned. The father was given no such warning,”
which shows that the case you put forward deals more with the procedure which should be followed to prosecute someone for contempt of court but not the fact that someone intentionally not enclose a proper statement of truth in a written representation attached to an application notice to mislead the court without risking prosecution for contempt
Other cases are available on that blog.
And you may ask the court to disregard purported evidence not verified by a statement of truth.
The application notice being verified by a statement of truth I thought it was enough
The issue is that most of the people are not aware of this issue of statements being verified by a statement of truth
I have difficulties to believe that we can send to court in total impunity all false statements we wish as long as we do not verify them by a statement of truth
A party can take into account the contents of the statements sent by the other party to decide whether or not to appeal or issued further claims. My question is what can do this party when later he notices that these statements are untrue and that he was misled in issuing appeals and other claims because of them and has been ordered to pay the cost of these appeals and other claims?
"Other cases are available on that blog"
However, these others cases are not about the issue raised by my thread. If I am wrong I would be grateful to you if you tell which are these other cases which raise the same issue as my thread
One day when I was in a hearing I noticed that a statement from the defendant was not verified by a statement of truth and I asked the judge to reject it for this reason. However, the judge did not reject it because he asked the defendant to verify his statement orally during this hearing.
Hence, does what matter is whether the claimant had knowingly made false statements and this issue of verification by a statement is only a "technicality" which could be used by dishonest litigants to try to get around the law on contempt?
Moreover when the other party and the judge read a big witness statement with plenty of documents attached it is difficult for them to pay attention to whether or not all are verified by statements of truth
At the end of the day the defendant has intentionally sent to the court statements that he knew were false and if he cannot be prosecuted for contempt because of the trick he used of not intentionally verifying them by a statement of truth, can the court nevertheless punishes this defendant in another way?
The claim where the statement was verified with a statement of truth orally during the hearing is an old claim that I put forward as an example
The problem with false statements is a new claim which is a different claim that my old claim
It is always good advice to parties to court proceedings to keep their eye on the ball. If you think the other party has said something that you can disprove, the focus on the evidence and on proving the other party is wrong.
Getting hung up on whether the other party is lying etc is not helpful, and as far as you are concerned should be a side track to be avoided. The judge will decide the case on the evidence before him and will draw whatever conclusions he or she thinks necessary or appropriate.
I was not able to notice at the time I received the false statements that they were false. It was only a long time after when I issued another claim against the defendant that he filed statements where he made disclosures which mean that his previous statements of the previous claims were false
Whether you are able to do anything about it now will to a large extent depend on how crucial the evidence that you now question was to the original decision. It sometimes happens that a judge says, more or less "I see, but that would not have altered my decision as to the outcome of the case".
If your later case is ongoing, use your findings against your defendant.
The problem is that the Defendant attached the false statements to an application notice he put his name and signed them but he does not put the usual words
"I believe that what is stated in this statement is true"
and I would like to know if it makes a difference?