Reynard v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 June 2001 |
| Date | 22 June 2001 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
Chancery Division
Before Mr Justice Blackburne.
Directors - disqualification proceedings - deceitful performance of respondent in witness box - did not form a separate head of misconduct
The deceitful performance in the witness box of a respondent in proceedings under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 might be highly relevant as to whether an allegation of misconduct already relied upon was or was not established to the satisfaction of the court.
However, it could not form a discrete head of misconduct in its own right, nor could it justify making a disqualification order in respect of a longer period than would otherwise have been the case.
Mr Justice Blackburne so held in the Chancery Division, allowing in part the appeal of Christopher Paul Reynard, formerly a director of Howglen Ltd, from a disqualification order made against him by Mr Registrar Simmonds on July 24, 2000. His Lordship reduced the period of disqualification from ten to five and a half years.
Mr Augustus Ullstein, QC and Mr Ian McCulloch for Mr Reynard; Mr Gregory Banner for the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.
MR JUSTICE BLACKBURNE said, applying In re Verby Print for Advertising LtdUNK ((1998) 2 BCLC 23, 28-31), that an appeal from the order of the registrar in disqualification proceedings was a true appeal and not a re-hearing.
The appellate court should be reluctant to interfere with findings of primary fact by the court below, and was at a particular disadvantage where the court below's findings on unfitness had been influenced by the demeanour of the respondent in the witness box.
In the present case the registrar had found Mr Reynard to have been a most unsatisfactory witness. He had "lacked frankness" and had been "disingenuous, equivocal and on some occasions untruthful".
However, his Lordship rejected the submissions of Mr Banner, based onIn re Godwin Warren Control Systems LtdUNK ((1993) BCLC 80), that Mr Reynard's performance as a witness could be taken into account as a separate, albeit unpleaded, allegation of unfitness in its own right.
It was true that in Godwin Warren Mr Justice Chadwick had considered (at p92) that a person's conduct in relation to disqualification proceedings fell to be treated as part of his conduct as a director of the relevant companies.
However, in that case the judge was saying no more than that the director's performance in the witness...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R (Mani) v Lambeth London Borough Council ; R (Tasci) v Enfield London Borough Council; R (J) v Same
...so held when dismissing the appeal of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry from the decision of Mr Justice Blackburne (The Times July 10, 2001) to reduce from ten to five and a half years the length of the disqualification order imposed under section 6 of the Company Directors Disq......