Medway Council v L [2017] EWHC B29 (QB) (24 November 2017)

Medway Council v L [2017] EWHC B29 (QB) (24 November 2017)

Mr L breached both the reporting restriction and protection from harassment injunctions by disclosing information likely to identify the child and engaging in prohibited conduct. No statutory defence applies. The breaches are proved to the criminal standard, and the suspended sentences are activated due to repeated contempt and lack of remorse.

Citation
[2017] EWHC B29
Parties
Claimant: Medway Council; Defendant: Mr L
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Committal Proceedings for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Applications for Breaches of Injunctions
Outcome
Defendant found in contempt of court for breaches of injunctions; sentenced to imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Injunctions, Contempt of Court, Protection From Harassment, Reporting Restrictions
Family Law Civil Procedure Criminal Contempt Injunctions Contempt of Court Protection From Harassment Reporting Restrictions

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Medway Council

Claimant

Mr L

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Committal Proceedings for Contempt of Court / Judgment on Applications for Breaches of Injunctions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr L breached the reporting restriction injunction of Theis J
  2. 2 Whether Mr L breached the protection from harassment injunction
  3. 3 Whether any statutory defence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 applies

Ratio Decidendi

Mr L breached both the reporting restriction and protection from harassment injunctions by disclosing information likely to identify the child and engaging in prohibited conduct. No statutory defence applies. The breaches are proved to the criminal standard, and the suspended sentences are activated due to repeated contempt and lack of remorse.

Court Disposition

Defendant found in contempt of court for breaches of injunctions; sentenced to imprisonment.

Orders

  • Mr L sentenced to 6 months imprisonment for each breach, to run concurrently.
  • Suspended 56 day sentences for previous breaches activated, to run concurrently.