M (A Child), Re

M (A Child), Re

The evidence was sufficient to prove breaches of undertakings to the criminal standard; procedural defects did not cause injustice; Mr M deliberately avoided attending court and cannot avoid consequences by absence; appeal dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Mr M; 1st Respondent: Ms S; 2nd Respondent: Leeds City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Children Act Proceedings, Contact Orders, Undertakings, Procedural Fairness
Family Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Children Act Proceedings Contact Orders Undertakings Procedural Fairness

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr M

Applicant

Ms S

1st Respondent

Leeds City Council

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr M breached undertakings given to the court
  2. 2 Whether the evidence satisfied the criminal standard of proof
  3. 3 Whether the judge should have adjourned the committal hearing to allow representation

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence was sufficient to prove breaches of undertakings to the criminal standard; procedural defects did not cause injustice; Mr M deliberately avoided attending court and cannot avoid consequences by absence; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Identity of the child not to be published