London Borough Of Newham v Jones [2002] EWCA Civ 1779 (19 November 2002)

London Borough Of Newham v Jones [2002] EWCA Civ 1779 (19 November 2002)

The judge's refusal of bail was a proper exercise of discretion given the seriousness of the allegations, proximity of the parties, and risk of repeated conduct. There was no error or procedural irregularity justifying appellate intervention.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1779
Parties
Claimant/respondent: London Borough of Newham; Defendant/appellant: Richard Jones
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Remand in Custody Order Pending Committal Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Committal for Contempt, Bail, Remand in Custody
Housing Law Civil Procedure Injunctions Committal for Contempt Bail Remand in Custody

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

Parties

London Borough of Newham

Claimant/respondent

Richard Jones

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Remand in Custody Order Pending Committal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing bail to the appellant pending a committal hearing for alleged breach of injunction
  2. 2 Whether the court has power to reconsider bail if circumstances change

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's refusal of bail was a proper exercise of discretion given the seriousness of the allegations, proximity of the parties, and risk of repeated conduct. There was no error or procedural irregularity justifying appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application and appeal dismissed with costs
  • Detailed assessment of the appellant's costs