NZ’s Cairns bailed on perjury charge

Former all-rounder accused of making false statement in libel action


Afp October 02, 2014

LONDON: New Zealand cricket great Chris Cairns appeared in a London court yesterday to face a charge of perjury relating to a libel action he brought in England in 2012.

Cairns won £90,000 after he sued former Indian Premier League (IPL) chairman Lalit Modi over a 2010 tweet accusing the all-rounder of match-fixing during his time in the now defunct Indian Cricket League (ICL).

However, Cairns was charged with perjury last month and appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court in central London on Thursday.

Cairns appeared alongside lawyer Andrew Fitch-Holland, who faces one count of perverting the course of justice. Fitch-Holland, 49, was lead adviser to Cairns in the action against Modi.

They were given unconditional bail and lawyers for the pair indicated they would contest the charges.

After learning he would be charged, the 44-year-old Cairns said in a statement he had "nothing to hide" and he would do "whatever it takes" to prove his innocence and "clear my name once and for all."

In 2007 and 2008, Cairns captained the Chandigarh Lions in the ICL, which has since been superseded by the Indian board-backed IPL.

Modi's allegation related to the second and third editions of the competition in 2008.

Cairns has been charged with making a false statement, namely that he had never cheated at cricket nor would he contemplate doing such a thing.

Fitch-Holland is charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice by asking former New Zealand player Lou Vincent to provide a false witness statement in the libel action.

Cairns retired from international cricket in 2004 after becoming one of only 12 players in Test history to complete the 'double' of 200 wickets and 3,000 runs.

 

Like Sports on Facebook, follow @ETribuneSports on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ