Vimpany v Chelsea & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 1336 (30 May 2002)
The judge correctly balanced the harm to both parties under the Family Law Act and found in favour of the respondent. There was no error of law or fact, and the appeal had no real prospect of success. Therefore, the application for a stay of execution must be dismissed.
- Citation
- [2002] EWCA Civ 1336
- Parties
- Claimant (respondent): Madeleine Vimpany; First Defendant (applicant): Christopher Douglas Chelsea; Second Defendant: Jeffrey Frederick Carlton
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 30 May 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Applications dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Occupation Orders, Injunctions, Harassment, Disability, Possession Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Madeleine Vimpany
Claimant (respondent)
Christopher Douglas Chelsea
First Defendant (applicant)
Jeffrey Frederick Carlton
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether to grant a stay of execution of an order for possession pending appeal
- 2 Whether the judge erred in granting an injunction and possession order against the applicant
Ratio Decidendi
The judge correctly balanced the harm to both parties under the Family Law Act and found in favour of the respondent. There was no error of law or fact, and the appeal had no real prospect of success. Therefore, the application for a stay of execution must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Applications dismissed
Orders
- Application for stay of execution dismissed
- No stay of execution granted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment