Moutreuil v Andreewitch (Contempt: Sentence) (Rev 1)

Moutreuil v Andreewitch (Contempt: Sentence) (Rev 1)

Only a sentence of imprisonment is appropriate for the deliberate and repeated breach of the freezing order, but the term is suspended due to the impact on family relationships and children.

Parties
Applicant: Magali Moutreuil; Respondent: Peter Andreewitch; Respondent: Pier Investments Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing
Outcome
Suspended custodial sentence imposed for contempt.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunction, Contempt of Court, Sanctions, Children Act 1989
Family Law Civil Procedure Freezing Injunction Contempt of Court Sanctions Children Act 1989

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

Parties

Magali Moutreuil

Applicant

Peter Andreewitch

Respondent

Pier Investments Company Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Deliberate breach of freezing injunction
  2. 2 Appropriate sanction for contempt
  3. 3 Impact of breach on proprietary interests and children

Ratio Decidendi

Only a sentence of imprisonment is appropriate for the deliberate and repeated breach of the freezing order, but the term is suspended due to the impact on family relationships and children.

Court Disposition

Suspended custodial sentence imposed for contempt.

Orders

  • Respondent sentenced to 6 months imprisonment, suspended for 12 months.
  • Respondent to pay applicant's costs of the application on an indemnity basis, subject to detailed assessment.