Allason and Another v Random House (UK) Ltd (No.2): ChD 19 Apr 2002

Application was made by the successful defendant for the committal of the claimant for breach of court orders consequent on the loss.
Held: Mr Allason was in contempt, but should be given a further short opportunity to comply.
Neuberger J said: ‘Freezing orders and disclosure orders, such as that made by Lloyd J, are a serious invasion of an individual’s privacy and freedom, and in some cases those against whom they are made have considerable cause for complaint and concern. They are, however, orders of the court and are justified where a person is, or appears to be, seeking to avoid his liabilities. When the court makes such orders, it is very important that they are complied with and complied with promptly. If it transpires that such an order should never have been made or was unfairly made, then a defendant should be entitled to be fully compensated for any damage suffered, and any claimant who wrongly obtains such an order does so very much at his peril. That does not alter the fact that such orders are only granted when they appear to be justified, and, when they are granted, they should most certainly be complied with and taken seriously. I regard Mr Allason’s delay in complying with the order, with no remotely justifiable excuse, as a quite unacceptable and serious contempt.’


Neuberger J


[2002] EWHC 1030 (Ch)




England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.374040