header-logo header-logo

Things aren’t always what they seem

20 June 2013 / Siobhan Jones , Caroline Shea KC
Issue: 7565 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail
157439656

When is an undertaking not an undertaking, ask Caroline Shea & Siobhan Jones

Undertakings make the legal world go round. Giving an undertaking to the court is a very serious matter, involving a party entering into a direct relationship with the court under which any conduct inconsistent with the undertaking is subject to the court’s discipline.

So weighty is the stuff of an undertaking that its breach is automatically characterised as a contempt of court, and so grievously is such conduct regarded that sanctions lie not merely in fines, but, if the contempt is serious enough and/or remains unpurged, in imprisonment.

Thus it is that both lawyers and the court go to great lengths to explain to the party offering the undertaking the nature of the obligation, and the consequences of breach. And thus it was that when Mr Salih, a business tenant of a fish and chip shop in Kent, gave his undertaking to the Dartford County Court in June 2007, the seriousness of the promise

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll