Reply to: Legal Beagle question

[Paddy]

Thanks to all and congratulations to Incognito, I hope you charge £300per hour.

It's worth bothering a QC in criminal matters, I will let you know his opinion

BTW: It is the English Court and not my case.

[Scruff]

Incognito

Firstly, IANAL.
Secondly, the OP doesn't state whether this occurred in E&W, Scotland or the Republic of Ireland (Paddy?)
Thirdly, IYAAL, please accept my apology for referring to Delict. I should have just said "damages". I could have mentioned "tort" or gone pedantic, but this is the General part of the forum.
Fourthly, IYAAL and practicing, give us the benefit of your wisdom and some constructive advice, please?

Always willing to learn from others whose wisdom has been acquired through years of Academic study, Professional Practice and practical application.

[vetran]

Is it provable as a lie?

Did it cause you to suffer loss?

Can you sue for the loss?

Armchair wing commander / lawyer.

so no value (before Ass gets in - as usual).

[mudskipper]

Finishing the law degree (last month) and being a father. Eight months old, every day is deep joy.

Wow - Congrats on both counts!

[Incognito]

Long time no see. Been up to anything exciting?

Finishing the law degree (last month) and being a father. Eight months old, every day is deep joy.

[mudskipper]

Long time no see. Been up to anything exciting?

[Incognito]

If it's a criminal case, then for a witness statement to be admissible without the witness giving evidence in court, the statement must include a declaration that it is true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief and that it was made knowing that, if it were tendered in evidence, the maker would be liable to prosecution if s/he wilfully stated in it anything which he knew to be false or did not believe to be true - section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act.

Unfortunately you're being caught out by the nuances of statutory offences. If being accused of Perjury, you are being charged with an offence under section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911.

1 Perjury.
(1) If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.

Note, ignore the reference to penal servitude, we no longer have the ability to sentence individuals to hard labour in this country, any reference to penal servitude is taken to read imprisonment, the maximum sentencing powers the court has is seven years imprisonment.

You are correct in your point where you say a breach of s.9 Criminal Justice Act 1967 is an offence, however you would be charged with an offence under s. 89 of the CJA. This is similar to an offence under s.106 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 however, you would not be charged with 'perjury' these offences are known as 'offences akin to perjury'.

However, we digress from the OP's original post, perjury requires the individual to have sworn an oath or made an affirmation, a statement of truth is neither of these. In a civil matter the correct action is for contempt of court.

[DodgyAgent]

Legal Beagle question
If a witness writes a witness statement that contains proven lies eg: Accusing a respondent has been convicted of a criminal offence when they know the respondent does has none. Can the witness be sued? I can’t find and reference to that scenario. BTW, the Judge did not reprimand the witness.

You've come to the right place for legal advice.

I've just been given 5 years for colliding into someone's front offside bumper with the nearside passenger door of my car. If I hadn't come here for legal advice I reckon I would have got life.

[DirtyDog]

Perjury requires the individual to have sworn an oath or made an affirmation, a statement of truth is neither of these.

If it's a criminal case, then for a witness statement to be admissible without the witness giving evidence in court, the statement must include a declaration that it is true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief and that it was made knowing that, if it were tendered in evidence, the maker would be liable to prosecution if s/he wilfully stated in it anything which he knew to be false or did not believe to be true - section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act.

[Incognito]

Perjury or PCOJ - perverting the course of justice

Perverting the course of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A criminal offence often involving jail time. If the CPS persue it.

Perjury requires the individual to have sworn an oath or made an affirmation, a statement of truth is neither of these.

(1) If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury,

Perjury Act 1911, Ch. 6, s. 1 (Eng.)

The correct means to prosecution would be for contempt of court, assuming this is a civil case then the guidance is set out in the Civil Procedure Rules

32.14

(1) Proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against a person if he makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

(Part 22 makes provision for a statement of truth)

(Section 6 of Part 81 contains provisions in relation to committal for making a false statement of truth.)

PART 32 - EVIDENCE - Civil Procedure Rules

There is nothing to stop you from writing to the court in question asking that this is looked at and for contempt of court proceedings to be brought against the party.

You can "sue" anyone for anything, since in Civil Law, it is your money that is paying for your Lawyer.

Whether you succeed, or not, is subject to the provisions of the Law and the case that you have, the evidence led and what you are trying to achieve. If you are "suing for damages", then delict will only grant you damages to the extent of the actual damages incurred, the quantum of which will be determined by the Court.

IANAL

No idea where you've been googling, however delict is a civil law doctrine and is not relevant for England and Wales.

[SueEllen]

Perjury or PCOJ - perverting the course of justice

Perverting the course of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A criminal offence often involving jail time. If the CPS persue it.

It has to be in the "public interest" for the CPS to persue it.....

[KentPhilip]

Perjury or PCOJ - perverting the course of justice

Perverting the course of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A criminal offence often involving jail time. If the CPS persue it.

[SueEllen]

Legal Beagle question
If a witness writes a witness statement that contains proven lies eg: Accusing a respondent has been convicted of a criminal offence when they know the respondent does has none. Can the witness be sued? I can’t find and reference to that scenario. BTW, the Judge did not reprimand the witness.

The judge doesn't need to.

They will just not take their evidence into consideration when making their judgement.

In some cases where the person is making a blatant lie which will lead their financial gain and there is documentary evidence to prove so the judge will say something.

[Scruff]

You can "sue" anyone for anything, since in Civil Law, it is your money that is paying for your Lawyer.

Whether you succeed, or not, is subject to the provisions of the Law and the case that you have, the evidence led and what you are trying to achieve. If you are "suing for damages", then delict will only grant you damages to the extent of the actual damages incurred, the quantum of which will be determined by the Court.

IANAL

[Boney M]

Nope.

Also it was down to the judge, magistrate or CPS to angle for the perjury element to be looked into.

Also not difficult for the person to say, well i thought they had a conviction because that was what I heard. Not going anywhere this one