Lee Mavin v Kare Wyatt

Lee Mavin v Kare Wyatt

Given the high culpability, serious and persistent contempt, and significant harm to the respondent and the administration of justice, a custodial sentence of 6 months on each count, to run concurrently and take effect immediately, is appropriate. The criteria for suspending the sentence are not met as there is insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or strong personal mitigation, and the impact on others does not justify suspension.

Parties
Appellant: Lee Mavin; Respondent: Karen Wyatt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Committal for Contempt / Resentencing After Partial Appeal Allowed
Outcome
Appeal against sentence allowed in part; sentence reduced and reimposed; no suspension granted.
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Abuse of Debt Respite Scheme, Sentencing Principles, Suspension of Sentence
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Landlord and Tenant Law Committal for Contempt Abuse of Debt Respite Scheme Sentencing Principles Suspension of Sentence

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Mavin

Appellant

Karen Wyatt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Committal for Contempt / Resentencing After Partial Appeal Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for five counts of contempt of court involving fraudulent use of the debt respite scheme?
  2. 2 Should the sentence of imprisonment be suspended given the appellant's personal mitigation and mental health?
  3. 3 What is the correct application of sentencing principles for contempt in the civil context?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the high culpability, serious and persistent contempt, and significant harm to the respondent and the administration of justice, a custodial sentence of 6 months on each count, to run concurrently and take effect immediately, is appropriate. The criteria for suspending the sentence are not met as there is insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or strong personal mitigation, and the impact on others does not justify suspension.

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence allowed in part; sentence reduced and reimposed; no suspension granted.

Orders

  • Appellant sentenced to 6 months' imprisonment on each of five counts, to run concurrently and take effect immediately.
  • No deduction for time previously spent in custody.