Bar'yudin v Pilipenko

Bar'yudin v Pilipenko

There were no arguable grounds for appeal; the respondent had multiple opportunities to present evidence and arrange legal representation; the orders for possession and committal were valid and enforceable; the suspended sentence was an appropriate penalty for contempt.

Parties
Applicant: Bar'yudin; Respondent: Pilipenko
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ancillary Relief, Possession Orders, Committal for Contempt, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Civil Procedure Ancillary Relief Possession Orders Committal for Contempt Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

Bar'yudin

Applicant

Pilipenko

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original ancillary relief and possession orders were valid and enforceable
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was in contempt for failing to comply with court orders
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was entitled to adjournment for legal representation

Ratio Decidendi

There were no arguable grounds for appeal; the respondent had multiple opportunities to present evidence and arrange legal representation; the orders for possession and committal were valid and enforceable; the suspended sentence was an appropriate penalty for contempt.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Suspended sentence of 14 days' imprisonment for contempt upheld