A TORY MP lied under oath and behaved in an abusive, arrogant and aggressive manner in a dispute over his family business, a High Court judge has ruled.

Andrew Bridgen, the MP for North West Leicestershire, has been locked in a years-long legal battle against his own family’s potato and vegetable business.

The Conservative claims the firm treated him unfairly and forced him out. But after being ruled an unreliable and combative witness who tried to conceal his own misconduct, he could now be made to pay millions of pounds in legal fees. Bridgen could also face an inquiry from the parliamentary standards watchdog.

The Sunday Times reports that the Tory was found to have pressured a police inspector to investigate his brother over false allegations of fraud, sparking a probe lasting more than a year.

Judge Brian Rawlings ruled the MP also lied about why he stepped down from the business, AB Produce, nearly 10 years ago. In court, Bridgen claimed he was ousted by his brother Paul. But the judge ruled that he actually resigned because he thought it would reduce the amount he owed his first wife Jackie in divorce proceedings.

Rawling added that the parliamentarian “tailored evidence to suit his purposes” during cross-examination.

He was also “dishonest” about why he reported his brother for fraud to the police, accountancy firm KPMG and Lloyd’s Bank.

AB Produce – which for a period of five years after he was elected in 2010 paid Bridgen £93,000 a year to attend monthly board meetings – is suing him over claims he has failed to pay rent on a £1.5 million property owned by the firm.

Peter Ellis, an AB produce director, told the court: “Andrew said that he was effectively bankrupt and could not live on an MP’s salary.”

He also said that in January 2017, the Tory MP sent texts that were so aggressive that he was on the verge of a “nervous breakdown”. It is claimed Bridgen later called a board meeting where he called the directors a “team of w*****s” and “liars and thieves”.

Rawling ruled that Bridgen “gave evasive and argumentative answers and tangential speeches that avoided answering the questions”.

The judge will now decide on any penalties for technical breaches of company law and who is liable for millions of pounds in legal costs.

Bridgen told the Sunday Times: “The judge has made his judgment and some of it is disappointing reading for me.”

He said that “in actuality I won the case and my brother will be compelled by the court in due course to repay considerable sums of money back to the businesses”.

The MP added his legal team were “exploring all avenues with regard to legal options to obtain a just outcome”, adding “if courts always got everything correct the first time there would be no need for appeal mechanisms”.