DS v HR

The respondent is in admitted contempt for failing to pay child maintenance under a consent order. The contempt impedes justice, and no effective alternative enforcement exists. The Hadkinson doctrine is not so inflexible as to preclude its application to related proceedings. The appeal will be struck out unless the respondent pays the arrears and ongoing maintenance.

Parties: Applicant: DS; Respondent: HR
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 01 August 2019
Procedural Posture: Family Law Act Application / Judgment on Hadkinson Order Application
Outcome: Hadkinson order granted
Legal Topics: Hadkinson Order, Child Maintenance, Contempt of Court, Appeal Proceedings

Family Law Hadkinson Order Child Maintenance Contempt of Court Appeal 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Applicant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Act Application / Judgment on Hadkinson Order Application

Legal Issues

1 Whether a Hadkinson order can bar the respondent from proceeding with an appeal due to admitted default in child maintenance payments
2 Whether the Hadkinson doctrine applies to related but not identical proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Hadkinson order granted

Orders

Unless the respondent pays maintenance due on 1 June, 1 July, 1 August, and sums due on 1 September and 1 October as they fall due, the appeal will be struck out.
Charging order application adjourned generally with liberty to restore.