Oliver v Shaikh

Oliver v Shaikh

The Defendant was found, to the criminal standard, to have breached the injunction order by failing to remove specified online material and by posting further harassing content about the Claimant. The court was satisfied the Defendant was the operator of the 'Judges Behaving Badly' website, that his denials were false, and that his breaches were deliberate and flagrant. The court proceeded in the Defendant's absence due to his deliberate non-attendance and found the procedural requirements for committal were met.

Parties
Claimant: Simon Oliver; Defendant: Javed Shaikh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court / Committal Application / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Pending Penalty Hearing
Outcome
Defendant found in contempt of court for multiple breaches of injunction; penalty hearing adjourned.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctions, Harassment, Breach of Court Orders, Online Publication, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Media Law Harassment Contempt of Court Injunctions Breach of Court Orders Online Publication Procedural Fairness

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Oliver

Claimant

Javed Shaikh

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court / Committal Application / Judgment on Liability for Contempt, Pending Penalty Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant breached the terms of an injunction order by failing to remove and by posting harassing material online about the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant is the operator of the 'Judges Behaving Badly' website
  3. 3 Whether the committal application could proceed in the Defendant's absence

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was found, to the criminal standard, to have breached the injunction order by failing to remove specified online material and by posting further harassing content about the Claimant. The court was satisfied the Defendant was the operator of the 'Judges Behaving Badly' website, that his denials were false, and that his breaches were deliberate and flagrant. The court proceeded in the Defendant's absence due to his deliberate non-attendance and found the procedural requirements for committal were met.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Findings of contempt entered against the Defendant for breaches (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (9), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), (17), (20), (21), (22), (23), (24), and (25) as set out in Appendix 1.
  • Alleged breaches (10), (11), (18), (19), (26), and (27) dismissed.