London Borough of Barnet v Hurst: CA 17 Jul 2002

The applicant had been sentenced to nine months imprisonment for having broken his undertaking to the Court. He appealed against that sentence. The other party also sought to appeal other parts of the order.
Held: An appeal limited to the sentencing part of a committal for contempt did not require leave to appeal, being as of right under the section, but an appeal against any other part did require leave, but could be heard either by a circuit judge in the County Court, or made direct to the Court of Appeal. Second Appeals would be the Court of Appeal.
Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Brook and Lord Justice Dyson
Times 12-Aug-2002, Gazette 19-Sep-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1009, [2002] 4 All ER 457, [2002] CP Rep 74, [2003] 1 WLR 722, [2003] HLR 244
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 52.13, Administration of Justice Act 1960 13
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedM v M (Breaches of orders: Committal) CA 28-Jul-2005
The mother sought to appeal refusal of a judge to commit the father for contempt in not complying many times with court orders related to residence and contact.
Held: Leave was required for such an appeal. The rules distinguished between an . .
CitedOffice of Fair Trading v Miller CA 3-Feb-2009
Order must be clear to found contempt charge
The defendant appealed against a finding of contempt of court after being found to have sold defective kitchen equipment in breach of a stop order. The defendant had been previously committed for breach of the same order, and released on his . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 March 2021; Ref: scu.174334