Summons Discharged In A Breach Of Embargo Contempt Case (Wright v McCormack)

• Published date: 14 June 2023
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Disclosure & Electronic Discovery & Privilege, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution
• Law Firm: Gatehouse Chambers
• Author: Mr Phillip Patterson

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Divisional Court has rejected a number of legal arguments made on behalf of a litigant subject to a contempt application but nevertheless discharged the summons and brought the application to an end.

Wright v McCormack [2023] EWHC 1030 (KB)

What are the practical implications of this case?

This is the latest in a number of reported judgments in relation to breaches of the embargo on reserved judgments in PD40E. It raises a number of interesting questions in relation to the status and admissibility of a report filed on behalf of the litigant accused of contempt in circumstances where the litigant claims that the report was submitted without his authorisation. The limited scope of a civil court dealing with a contempt application to investigate factual disputes in such circumstances was highlighted. Ultimately, in this case this led to the dismissal of the application rather than its referral to the Attorney General, having weighed the time and costs associated with such an investigation against the sanction likely to be imposed if the application succeeded.

What was the background?

Dr Wright claims to be "Satoshi Nakamoto", the inventor of Bitcoin. Peter McCormack tweeted and said in a recorded discussion that this was a fraudulent and mendacious claim. Dr Wright sued Mr McCormack for libel. At trial, Chamberlain J concluded that some of Mr McCormack's publications were defamatory and caused serious harm to Dr Wright's reputation at the time that they were made. The Judge concluded that Dr Wright's claim on liability was made out, however, he awarded only nominal damages of £1. On 26 July 2022, a draft judgment setting out those conclusions was circulated to the parties in confidence, and subject to the usual embargo in PD40E. On the evening of 26 July 2022, Dr Wright posed a series of messages on Slack which said:

"If a person would spend 4 million to receive a dollar plus and 2 million costs ...

So the other side is bankrupt ...

What would you think? ...

Ie. the only thing that matters is crushing the other side ... Well. I would spend 4 million to make an enemy pay 1."

RPC, acting for Mr McCormack observed the messages and contacted Dr Wright's solicitors, Ontier. RPC noted that Dr Wright's initial budget was in the sum of £4 million and alleged that the messages breached the embargo applicable to the draft judgment. Ontier wrote to Chamberlain J via his clerk, indicating that they were aware of the messages and were...