Contempt of court proceedings were brought against Mr Montgomery by Churchill Insurance on the basis that Mr Montgomery had allegedly made an inflated claim for damages in a personal injury claim. The Attorney General declined to pursue Mr Montgomery for contempt but Churchill decided to continue with the proceedings in any event.
In order for Churchill to be successful, they needed to satisfy the court that the statements which Mr Montgomery had made were false, that he knew them to be false when he made them, and that at the time they were made they would have, if persisted in, been likely to interfere with the course of justice, and he knew they would be so likely to interfere.
After a 3-day trial, 2 further hearings, further disclosure in addition to the standard disclosure already given and another 2-day trial in March 2011, Judgment was handed down in favour of Mr Montgomery. Although Mr Montgomery accepted that he should have given more care and attention to the matter in hand and the documents which he signed than he did, the court did not consider that, when looking at all the circumstances of the case, the evidence put before the court met the required criminal standard.
