Oliver v Shaikh [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB) (24 August 2020)

Oliver v Shaikh [2020] EWHC 2253 (QB) (24 August 2020)

The defendant was properly served, had full notice, and deliberately chose not to attend. The evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant breached the injunction by failing to remove specified material and by posting or causing to be posted new harassing material. The defendant's denials are not credible and have been previously rejected. The court is justified in proceeding in his absence and finding contempt proved.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2253 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Simon Oliver; Defendant: Javed Shaikh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Committal Application for Contempt of Court (breach of Injunction) / Judgment on Liability (defendant Absent), Adjourned for Penalty
Outcome
Defendant found in contempt of court for breaches of injunction; penalty adjourned for further hearing.
Legal Topics
Breach of Injunction, Harassment, Committal Proceedings, Remote Hearings, Service of Process, Standard of Proof in Contempt, Proceeding in Absence of Defendant
Civil Procedure Media Law Harassment Contempt of Court Breach of Injunction Committal Proceedings Remote Hearings Service of Process +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Oliver

Claimant

Javed Shaikh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Application for Contempt of Court (breach of Injunction) / Judgment on Liability (defendant Absent), Adjourned for Penalty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the terms of the injunction order by failing to remove specified online material and by posting new harassing material
  2. 2 Whether the court should proceed in the defendant's absence
  3. 3 Whether the procedural requirements for committal for contempt were satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was properly served, had full notice, and deliberately chose not to attend. The evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant breached the injunction by failing to remove specified material and by posting or causing to be posted new harassing material. The defendant's denials are not credible and have been previously rejected. The court is justified in proceeding in his absence and finding contempt proved.

Court Disposition

Defendant found in contempt of court for breaches of injunction; penalty adjourned for further hearing.

Orders

  • Adjournment of sentencing/penalty to allow defendant opportunity to attend and make submissions.
  • Defendant found liable for contempt for specified breaches of the injunction.