Rundell v Rundell

Rundell v Rundell

The judge's conduct of the committal proceedings did not breach the debtor's Article 6 rights. The procedural safeguards were substantially observed, the arrears and obligation were properly established, and any technical imperfections did not affect the fairness or outcome of the proceedings. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant/appellant/defendant: David William Rundell; Respondent/claimant: Kathleen Elizabeth Rundell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Suspended Committal Order in Enforcement of Periodical Payments (judgment Summons)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Maintenance Orders, Committal for Non Payment, Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial Rights), Burden and Standard of Proof, Self Incrimination
Family Law Civil Procedure Human Rights Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Committal for Non Payment Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial Rights) Burden and Standard of Proof Self Incrimination

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David William Rundell

Applicant/appellant/defendant

Kathleen Elizabeth Rundell

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Suspended Committal Order in Enforcement of Periodical Payments (judgment Summons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the debtor's Article 6 rights (fair trial, presumption of innocence, privilege against self-incrimination, criminal standard of proof) were breached in committal proceedings for non-payment of maintenance
  2. 2 Whether the judge's conduct of the proceedings was unfair or prejudicial to the debtor

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's conduct of the committal proceedings did not breach the debtor's Article 6 rights. The procedural safeguards were substantially observed, the arrears and obligation were properly established, and any technical imperfections did not affect the fairness or outcome of the proceedings. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Costs to the respondent in the agreed sum of £4,306.38