Marshall Properties Ltd. v R H Tomlinssons (Trowbridge) Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 1314 (24 January 2003)

Marshall Properties Ltd. v R H Tomlinssons (Trowbridge) Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 1314 (24 January 2003)

The sentence of imprisonment imposed for contempt was unsafe due to procedural errors, including premature indication of penalty, failure to allow proper opportunity to address penalty, and lack of procedural safeguards; the breaches should remain recorded but no penalty imposed.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1314
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Marshall Properties Limited; Defendant/appellant: R H Tomlinssons (Trowbridge) Limited; Defendant/appellant: Mr Rothschild
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Committal and Refusal to Set Aside Injunction
Outcome
Appeal allowed to the extent that the sentence of imprisonment is quashed; breaches remain recorded but no penalty imposed.
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Injunctions, Recusal of Judge, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal Proceedings Injunctions Recusal of Judge Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marshall Properties Limited

Claimant/respondent

R H Tomlinssons (Trowbridge) Limited

Defendant/appellant

Mr Rothschild

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Committal and Refusal to Set Aside Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge should have recused himself due to personal knowledge of the right of way
  2. 2 Whether the injunction should have been set aside for lack of evidence of vehicle ownership
  3. 3 Whether the committal proceedings and sentence of imprisonment were procedurally correct

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of imprisonment imposed for contempt was unsafe due to procedural errors, including premature indication of penalty, failure to allow proper opportunity to address penalty, and lack of procedural safeguards; the breaches should remain recorded but no penalty imposed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent that the sentence of imprisonment is quashed; breaches remain recorded but no penalty imposed.

Orders

  • Sentence of imprisonment quashed
  • No penalty imposed for breaches