header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 December 2020 / Charles Kimmins KC , Andrew Dinsmore
Issue: 7913 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

CPR Pt 81: the new contempt of court roadmap

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
33613
Charles Kimmins QC & Andrew Dinsmore provide an overview of the changes to the contempt of court procedure ushered in by the new CPR Pt 81
  • The new CPR Pt 81 has overhauled the procedure for contempt of court for all applications on foot or commenced after 1 October 2020.
  • CPR Pt 81 does not change the substantive law in relation to jurisdiction for contempt of court.

The procedures for contempt of court applications were overhauled by the new CPR Pt 81 on 1 October 2020, which revoked the old CPR Pt 81 without any transitional measures pursuant to Civil Procedure (Amendment No 3) Rules 2020, (SI 2020/747), rules 1, 3 and 15. The latter states: ‘For Part 81 substitute Part 81 as set out in the Schedule to these Rules’. The Schedule contains the new CPR Pt 81 without reference to the old rules.

The UK explanatory notes state that: ‘The new Part 81 reduces the number of rules from

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Read All
‘Lost years’ precedent overturned
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
NLJ this week: Short lets & sharp covenants
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
NLJ this week: Justice at the algorithm’s edge
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
NLJ this week: Neutral counsel in a polarised age
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
NLJ this week: When ‘milk’ really means milk
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll