Mubarak v Mubarik

Mubarak v Mubarik

Non-payment of the lump sum order constitutes contempt of court, and the court may impose terms on the husband's participation in the substantive hearing. Proof of wilful non-payment is not required for contempt, but is relevant to the exercise of discretion, and the civil standard of proof applies. Exceptional terms are justified to ensure procedural justice and facilitate enforcement.

Parties
Applicant/wife: Aaliya Mubarak; Respondent/husband: Iqbal Mubarik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Family Division Ancillary Relief / Preliminary Application for Hadkinson Order
Outcome
Application succeeds in principle; husband placed on terms for participation in December 2006 hearing.
Legal Topics
Hadkinson Orders, Contempt of Court, Enforcement of Matrimonial Orders, Variation of Trusts, Standard of Proof in Contempt Proceedings
Family Law Trusts and Equity Civil Procedure Hadkinson Orders Contempt of Court Enforcement of Matrimonial Orders Variation of Trusts Standard of Proof in Contempt Proceedings

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aaliya Mubarak

Applicant/wife

Iqbal Mubarik

Respondent/husband

Procedural Posture

Family Division Ancillary Relief / Preliminary Application for Hadkinson Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-payment of matrimonial money orders constitutes contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether proof of wilful non-payment is required for contempt
  3. 3 Standard of proof required for contempt in Hadkinson applications

Ratio Decidendi

Non-payment of the lump sum order constitutes contempt of court, and the court may impose terms on the husband's participation in the substantive hearing. Proof of wilful non-payment is not required for contempt, but is relevant to the exercise of discretion, and the civil standard of proof applies. Exceptional terms are justified to ensure procedural justice and facilitate enforcement.

Court Disposition

Application succeeds in principle; husband placed on terms for participation in December 2006 hearing.

Orders

  • Husband to inform trustees of Jersey Trust by irrevocable letter accepting court's orders and requesting assistance in meeting obligations.
  • Husband to pay pound-for-pound into a joint solicitors' account for each pound paid to his own lawyers for December 2006 hearing preparation; funds to be paid to wife's solicitors unless court rules otherwise at conclusion.