Slade v Slade [2009] EWCA Civ 748 (17 July 2009)
The sentences imposed for contempt were manifestly excessive and failed to properly account for the prior criminal punishment for the same conduct; the appropriate total sentence for all contempts was six months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently.
- Citation
- [2009] EWCA Civ 748
- Parties
- Appellant: Melanie Slade; Respondent: Paul Anthony Slade
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 17 July 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Committal Order for Contempt of Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; sentences for contempt reduced.
- Legal Topics
- Committal for Contempt, Sentencing Principles, Double Jeopardy, Non Molestation Orders, Concurrent Criminal and Civil Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Melanie Slade
Appellant
Paul Anthony Slade
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Committal Order for Contempt of Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences imposed for contempt of court were manifestly excessive and/or duplicative of criminal punishment for the same conduct
- 2 Proper approach to sentencing for contempt where criminal proceedings have already occurred for the same or related conduct
- 3 Application of proportionality and avoidance of double punishment in contempt sentencing
Ratio Decidendi
The sentences imposed for contempt were manifestly excessive and failed to properly account for the prior criminal punishment for the same conduct; the appropriate total sentence for all contempts was six months' imprisonment, to be served concurrently.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; sentences for contempt reduced.
Orders
- Original committal order of 21 months set aside.
- Appellant to serve a total of six months' imprisonment for all contempts, sentences to run concurrently.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment