Prosser v Prosser

Prosser v Prosser

The defendant, Richard Prosser, was fully aware of the terms and effect of the consent order, deliberately breached it by failing to instruct his solicitors to remit the proceeds of sale to the nominated account, and spirited the money away to defeat the claimant's claims. The court dispensed with the requirement for service with a penal notice given the defendant's knowledge and deliberate conduct. Section 4 of the Debtors Act 1869 does not prevent committal in these circumstances. The contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt, and immediate imprisonment is warranted, reduced for age and infirmity.

Parties
Claimant: Malcolm Bernard Prosser; Defendant: Richard Kenneth John Prosser
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Application for Committal for Contempt
Outcome
Defendant found in contempt of court; committal ordered.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Consent Orders, Freezing Injunctions, Committal for Contempt, Debtors Act 1869, Service of Orders, Penal Notice Requirements
Civil Procedure Equity Contempt of Court Enforcement of Consent Orders Freezing Injunctions Committal for Contempt Debtors Act 1869 Service of Orders +1 more

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

Parties

Malcolm Bernard Prosser

Claimant

Richard Kenneth John Prosser

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment on Application for Committal for Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does a consent order need to be served prior to enforcement by committal?
  2. 2 Does the court have jurisdiction to dispense with service of the consent order?
  3. 3 Does section 4 of the Debtors Act 1869 prevent enforcement by committal?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant, Richard Prosser, was fully aware of the terms and effect of the consent order, deliberately breached it by failing to instruct his solicitors to remit the proceeds of sale to the nominated account, and spirited the money away to defeat the claimant's claims. The court dispensed with the requirement for service with a penal notice given the defendant's knowledge and deliberate conduct. Section 4 of the Debtors Act 1869 does not prevent committal in these circumstances. The contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt, and immediate imprisonment is warranted, reduced for age and infirmity.

Court Disposition

Defendant found in contempt of court; committal ordered.

Orders

  • Richard Prosser committed to prison for five months for contempt of court.
  • Court dispenses with service and penal notice requirements for enforcement of the consent order.