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 follow in relation to this same matter. I have to say that that is of no concern to this court which is dealing with the matter of contempt. That is not a matter which can affect this appeal.’ Sir Patrick Russell: ‘the order should not inhibit the prosecution of the respondent, which we are told is pending.’
Judges:
Sir Stephen Brown P, Sir Patrick Russell
Citations:
Times 05-Mar-1998, Gazette 25-Mar-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 355, [1998] 1 FLR 1097, [1998] 2 FCR 575
Statutes:
Administration of Justice Act 1960 13 (2)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
applied – N v R (Non-Molestation Order: Breach) CA 9-Sep-1998
Court of Appeal again felt justified in substituting immediate for suspended term of imprisonment where defendant in flagrant breach of domestic violence non-molestation order. . .
Cited – Lomas v Parle CA 18-Dec-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contempt of Court
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143833