Committal for false statements and breach of court orders (Atkinson v Varma)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Case details

Article summary

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The judge found the respondent (Mr Varma) in contempt of court for giving false statements in two affidavits and a witness statement, and for breaches of three court orders in the context of insolvency proceedings. While the case does not offer a discursive treatment of the authorities on committal for contempt, it does offer a practical reminder of how judges will approach such applications. In particular, highlights for legal practitioners the importance of particularising allegations in applications notices and submissions, as well as the higher burden of proof on committal applications than in other civil proceedings. Written by Poppy Rimington-Pounder, barrister, at Radcliffe Chambers.