Hart v Hart

Hart v Hart

The court had jurisdiction to accept the undertaking and make the February and July orders as they were ancillary to the effective implementation of the substantive financial remedy order. The appellant was in breach of the orders, and the sentence imposed was justified by the seriousness and persistence of the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: John Ralph Hart; Respondent: Karen Hart
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order and Related Orders
Outcome
Appeal from committal order for breaches of the undertaking allowed; all other appeals and applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Enforcement of Undertakings, Jurisdiction of Family Court, Financial Remedy Proceedings
Family Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Committal for Contempt Enforcement of Undertakings Jurisdiction of Family Court Financial Remedy Proceedings

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Ralph Hart

Appellant

Karen Hart

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Committal Order and Related Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to accept the undertaking and make the February and July orders after the substantive financial remedy order
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was in breach of the orders and undertaking
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed for contempt was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The court had jurisdiction to accept the undertaking and make the February and July orders as they were ancillary to the effective implementation of the substantive financial remedy order. The appellant was in breach of the orders, and the sentence imposed was justified by the seriousness and persistence of the contempt. The appeal from the committal order based on breaches of the undertaking was allowed by concession, but all other appeals and applications were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal from committal order for breaches of the undertaking allowed; all other appeals and applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Committal order for breaches of the undertaking set aside.
  • Application for extension of time to appeal the undertaking and orders refused.