The respondent had been sentenced to two months imprisonment for breaches of orders under the Act. The wife appealed, seeking to increase the sentence. The maximum sentence was two years.
Held: The court had to consider such cases in the light of any parallel criminal or civil proceedings under the 1997 Act. ‘This was a case with an appalling history of intimidation and abuse. At every turn the husband had flouted the orders of the court and seized any leniency as little more than an opportunity to resume his campaign against the wife. The two breaches in respect of which he was sentenced were both individually extremely sinister in their presentation and implication. We are of the opinion that a sentence of less than ten months’ imprisonment would have been unduly lenient. We only fixed a lesser sentence to reflect the element of double jeopardy. Accordingly the sentence which we passed on 30 October was a sentence of eight months’ imprisonment concurrent on each of the admitted breaches.’ and ‘the first court to sentence must not anticipate or allow for a likely future sentence. It is for the second court to sentence to reflect the prior sentence in its judgment in order to ensure that the defendant is not twice punished for the same act. It is essential that the second court should be fully informed of the factors and circumstances reflected in the first sentence.’
and: ‘so far as possible sentences passed under section 42 should not be manifestly discrepant with sentences for harassment charged under the 1997 Act.’
The President Of The Family Division Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Mance
[2003] EWCA Civ 1804, Times 13-Jan-2004, [2004] 1 All ER 1173, [2004] 1 FLR 812, [2004] 1 WLR 1642
Bailii
Family Law Act 1996 42, Contempt of Court Act 1981 14, Protection from Harrassment Act 1997
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Linnett v Coles QBD 1986
The defendant had repeatedly failed to obey orders for the production of documents made in the course of civil litigation proceedings. He was ordered to be committed to prison ‘until further order’ He appealed.
Held: With regard to section 14, . .
Cited – Wilson v Webster CA 26-Feb-1998
There is no reason in law to disallow someone applying for a contemnor to be committed, from appealing against the sentence imposed, but it would rare to allow interference. Brown P: ‘It is believed that it may be that criminal proceedings will . .
Cited – Neil v Ryan CA 23-Jul-1998
The court considered the power to increase a sentence of committal for contempt of court: ‘Before considering any increase in sentence or changing the impact of any sentence adversely to the defendant we have to remind ourselves that this is a power . .
Cited – Hale v Tanner CA 22-Aug-2000
When attaching a power of arrest on a non-molestation order the court should consider attaching it only to that element which restricts violence or proximity rather than to any part relating to harassment. When considering sentence for a breach, the . .
Cited – Regina v Liddle and Hayes CACD 24-May-1999
When sentencing for harassment, the court must look to previous failures to obey court orders, the defendant’s mental health, and his readiness to undergo treatment, as well as the seriousness of the conduct constituting the harassment. ‘For a . .
Cited by:
Cited – Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v General Medical Council and Dr Solanke Admn 30-Apr-2004
The council appealed against what it said was a lenient sentence imposed on a doctor for malpractice.
Held: It was relevant to take account of the way criminal courts dealt with appeals against lenient sentences. The test in relation to an . .
Cited – Dr Giuseppe Ruscill, Council for the Regulation of Health Care Professionals v The General Medical Council and Another, The Council for the Regulation of Health Care Profesionals, The Nursing and Midwifery Council, Truscott CA 20-Oct-2004
The Council sought to refer to the High Court decisions to acquit the doctors of professional misconduct. The doctors argued that the power only existed for lenient sentences.
Held: The power to refer for undue leniency included the situation . .
Applied with comments – Slade v Slade CA 17-Jul-2009
Contempt sentence to reflect existing punishment
The wife appealed against a sentence of imprisonment imposed for a second contempt of court. She said that the behaviour complained of had already been dealt with in criminal proceedings.
Held: The sentence was reduced. The second court should . .
Cited – Murray v Robinson CA 12-Jul-2005
M appealed from findings that he had been in contempt of court for three breaches of non-molestation injunctions.
Held: In this area, as in other areas, imprisonment needs to be reserved for those cases where imprisonment is necessary. It must . .
Cited – Regina v Liddle and Hayes CACD 24-May-1999
When sentencing for harassment, the court must look to previous failures to obey court orders, the defendant’s mental health, and his readiness to undergo treatment, as well as the seriousness of the conduct constituting the harassment. ‘For a . .
Cited – Murray v Robinson CA 12-Jul-2005
M appealed from findings that he had been in contempt of court for three breaches of non-molestation injunctions.
Held: In this area, as in other areas, imprisonment needs to be reserved for those cases where imprisonment is necessary. It must . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 October 2021; Ref: scu.189053
