Derbyshire County Council v James Grundy

Given the proven breaches of the injunction and the failure of suspended sentences to deter further contempt, immediate imprisonment is necessary to protect P's welfare and uphold the authority of the court. Both the suspended sentence and the new sentence of 28 days are to run concurrently.

Source-derived case information.

Parties: Claimant: Derbyshire County Council; Defendant: James Grundy; Interested Party: P (by Sarah Bendikas her litigation friend)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 30 January 2025
Procedural Posture: Contempt of Court Application / Sentencing After Finding of Contempt
Outcome: Suspended sentence activated; 28 days' immediate imprisonment imposed for new breaches, sentences to run concurrently.
Legal Topics: Contempt of Court, Injunctions, Sentencing, Best Interests, Supervised Contact

Court of Protection Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Injunctions Sentencing Best Interests Supervised Contact

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Derbyshire County Council

Claimant

James Grundy

Defendant

P (by Sarah Bendikas her litigation friend)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Application / Sentencing After Finding of Contempt

Legal Issues

1 Whether to activate suspended sentence for contempt
2 Appropriate sentence for four proven breaches of injunction
3 Impact of breaches on P's welfare

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Suspended sentence activated; 28 days' immediate imprisonment imposed for new breaches, sentences to run concurrently.

Orders

Mr. Grundy sentenced to 28 days' imprisonment.
Suspended sentence activated and to run concurrently.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.