header-logo header-logo

13 September 2018 / Lee Henderson
Issue: 7808 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Errors in committal

nlj_7808_henderson

Lee Henderson reflects on important differences between enforcement orders & enforcement by committal

  • Practitioners are reminded to think carefully about drafting orders to ensure their enforceability at a later date.
  • Enforcement orders and enforcement by committal are very different beasts.

On 25 May 2018 Mr Justice Baker gave judgment in the matter of CH v CT [2018] EWHC 1310 (Fam). The appellant mother sought to set aside a suspended order for her committal to prison as a result of non-compliance with a child arrangements order (CAO). The mother succeeded on the basis of procedural defects in the committal application brought by the child’s paternal grandmother and her partner, and because the order she allegedly breached was not drafted in a way that enabled a court to commit her to prison.

In CH v CT the committal order was set aside for the following reasons.

Wording

The wording of the CAO handed down at the hearing was not capable of being enforced by committal as it was not endorsed by a penal notice compliant

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

Michelman Robinson—Daniel Burbeary

Michelman Robinson—Daniel Burbeary

Firm names partner as London office managing partner

Bellevue Law—Sally Hall

Bellevue Law—Sally Hall

Employment boutique strengthens data protection and privacy offering with senior consultant hire

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’

NEWS
Personal injury lawyers have welcomed a government U-turn on a ‘substantial prejudice’ defence that risked enabling defendants in child sexual abuse civil cases to have proceedings against them dropped
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll