Civil Contempt: Questor accused the defendants of lying under oath, withholding evidence, and misleading Questor and the court. The court needed to determine if proving contempt for false testimony requires a higher standard than for breaching a court order.
Allegations: Defendants allegedly breached their duties by forming Emission Rx Ltd. while still employed by Questor. False evidence resulted in the denial of Questor’s applications for an injunction and profit preservation.
New Evidence: Post-discovery, new records contradicted previous sworn statements. Defendants admitted errors, prompting Questor’s contempt application.
Court's Analysis:
Case Management: The misassignment of the application was allowed to proceed with no objections.
Consolidation: The court decided against consolidating the contempt application with the trial to avoid prejudice and duplication.
Civil Contempt Law: The court confirmed that intentional acts of contempt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Contumacious intent (intent to deceive) is not required for civil contempt involving false evidence.
Decision:
The court found Questor proved that the defendants knew they had to be truthful and knew their statements were false. Some allegations were dismissed due to insufficient proof of intentional falsehood, but others were confirmed as intentional falsifications, fulfilling the criteria for civil contempt.
Outcome:
The court made specific findings of civil contempt against the defendants based on intentional falsification of evidence and withholding documents.
Specific details regarding the total monetary award, costs, or damages granted/ordered in this case are not provided in the available document.
