Gull v Gull

Gull v Gull

Given the appellant's low intelligence, learning difficulties, lack of violence, and the circumstances of the breach, the 21-month sentence was excessive. A sentence of 12 months is appropriate.

Parties
Appellant: Iqbal Gull; Respondent: Khumza Gull
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Non Molestation Orders, Committal for Contempt, Sentencing, Learning Difficulties and Vulnerability
Family Law Civil Procedure Non Molestation Orders Committal for Contempt Sentencing Learning Difficulties and Vulnerability

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

Iqbal Gull

Appellant

Khumza Gull

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 21-month sentence for breach of a non-molestation order was excessive given the appellant's vulnerabilities and circumstances
  2. 2 Appropriate sentencing for repeated breaches of non-molestation orders by a vulnerable adult

Ratio Decidendi

Given the appellant's low intelligence, learning difficulties, lack of violence, and the circumstances of the breach, the 21-month sentence was excessive. A sentence of 12 months is appropriate.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Original sentence of 21 months imprisonment set aside and substituted with 12 months imprisonment
  • Judgment to be supplied to Bradford Social Services for proactive management of appellant's release