H v Dent & Ors [2015] EWHC 2090 (Fam) (15 July 2015)

H v Dent & Ors [2015] EWHC 2090 (Fam) (15 July 2015)

The committal applications were fundamentally flawed for failure to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under Part 37 FPR 2010, including lack of particularisation, absence of penal notices, and failure to identify specific acts of contempt. The applications against the Second and Third Respondents had no...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 2090 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: H; First Respondent: Jason Dent; Second Respondent: Billie McKay; Third Respondent: Terri Harman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Committal Application (family Law) / Permission/strike Out Hearing Prior to Full Committal Hearing
Outcome
Applications against Second and Third Respondents struck out as abuse of process; permission to proceed refused. Application against First Respondent withdrawn with permission.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Procedural Compliance, Children Act 1989, Family Procedure Rules 2010, Consent Orders, Parental Responsibility, Indirect Contact, Family Assistance Orders
Family Law Civil Procedure Committal for Contempt Procedural Compliance Children Act 1989 Family Procedure Rules 2010 Consent Orders Parental Responsibility +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H

Applicant

Jason Dent

First Respondent

Billie McKay

Second Respondent

Terri Harman

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Committal Application (family Law) / Permission/strike Out Hearing Prior to Full Committal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the committal applications against the respondents should be allowed to proceed or struck out as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the applications comply with procedural requirements under the Family Procedure Rules 2010, Part 37
  3. 3 Whether there is a prima facie case of contempt against any respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The committal applications were fundamentally flawed for failure to comply with mandatory procedural requirements under Part 37 FPR 2010, including lack of particularisation, absence of penal notices, and failure to identify specific acts of contempt. The applications against the Second and Third Respondents had no legal basis and constituted an abuse of process. The application against the First Respondent was withdrawn with permission. No prima facie case of contempt was established against any respondent.

Court Disposition

Applications against Second and Third Respondents struck out as abuse of process; permission to proceed refused. Application against First Respondent withdrawn with permission.

Orders

  • Committal applications against Billie McKay and Terri Harman struck out
  • Permission to proceed with committal applications against Billie McKay and Terri Harman refused