• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (14 No

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (14 No

    More...

    This is in form a challenge to the refusal by Collins J, sitting in the Administrative Court on 6 November 2013, to issue a writ of habeas corpus. It is in substance a challenge to the decision of Theis J, sitting in the Family Division on 11 October 2013, to commit Margaret Connors to prison for 28 days for contempt of court. Collins J described the application for the writ as being, in the circumstances, "hopeless" and "entirely misconceived". I agree. The challenge to Theis J's decision is equally devoid of merit.

    ....................................
    42. Secondly, Practice Guidance (Committal Proceedings: Open Court) [2013] 1 WLR 1316 spelt out (paragraph 6) that:

    "In every case in which a committal order or a suspended committal order is made the judge should take appropriate steps to ensure that … as soon as reasonably practicable:

    (a) a transcript is prepared at public expense of the judgment …;

    (b) every judgment as referred to in (a) is published on the BAILII website; and

    (c) upon payment of any appropriate charge that may be required a copy of any such judgment is made available to any person who requests a copy."

    President's Circular: Committals Family Court Practice 2014 2976 spelt out that paragraph 6 of Practice Guidance (Committal Proceedings: Open Court) [2013] 1 WLR 1316 "applies in EVERY case in which a committal order or a suspended committal order is made, WITHOUT EXCEPTION." It went on:

    "The principle is very clear and MUST be rigorously followed. NO-ONE is EVER to be committed for contempt of court by a family court or the Court of Protection (whether the sentence is suspended or takes immediate effect) without (a) the name of the contemnor (b) proper details of the contempt(s) and (c) the reasons for the committal being made publically available in a judgment published on the BAILII website."

    .................................................. .........

    It is not the function of the court to assist Mr Hemming in his campaign and beyond recording his submissions there is, in my judgment, little that can appropriately be added to what I have already said. I can, however, properly make the following points:

    i) I draw the attention of all judges sitting in family courts to what I have said in paragraph 42 above. In particular, I emphasise that in every case in which a committal order or a suspended committal order is made, the judgment must be transcribed and published on the BAILII website "as soon as reasonably practicable" and, I stress, whether or not anyone has requested this. I suggest that in every case the judge, having given judgment, should immediately direct that a transcript be ordered the same day and prepared on an expedited basis.

    ii) In collection (or location) order cases where, as here, there is no committal application as such before the court, the matter should be shown in the public court list as follows:

    "FOR HEARING IN OPEN COURT [add, where there has been a remand in custody: in accordance with the order of [name of judge] dated [date]]

    Proceedings for the Committal to prison of [full names of the person alleged to be in contempt] who was arrested on [date] in accordance with and for alleged breach of a [location / collection] order made by [name of judge] on [date]."

    iii) In cases where it is not possible to publish these details in the public court list in the usual way the day before (for example, because the prisoner is produced at court by the Tipstaff on the morning of the hearing, having been arrested overnight), the following steps should be taken:

    a) Where, as in the Royal Courts of Justice, the public court list is prepared and accessible in electronic form, it should be updated with the appropriate entry as soon as the court becomes aware that the matter is coming before it. This can be done very quickly.[3]

    b) Notice of the hearing should at the same time be placed outside the door of the court in which the matter is being, or is to be heard, and at whatever central location in the building the various court lists are displayed.

    c) The Press Association should be notified by email from the Judicial Office of the fact that the hearing is taking or is shortly due to take place.

    iv) This is primarily a matter for others, but consideration might appropriately be given to ensuring that the statistics of the receptions of contemnors into prison accurately record in all cases details of the committing court. There ought not to be any insuperable obstacle to obtaining this information, because in every committal for contempt there will be a warrant identifying the sentencing court.

    I add one final observation. I would not for myself want to give any credence to the proposition that a failure to sit in open court or a failure to list the case properly or a failure to publish the judgment, suffices of itself to invalidate an otherwise proper committal for contempt, let alone that such a failure can entitle the contemnor to release on a writ of habeas corpus. Mr Hemming has produced no authority in support of the proposition and in my judgment it is fundamentally unsound.
    Last edited by Amethyst; 15th November 2014, 19:31:PM.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (1

    This case is quite interesting for me, as it relates to contempt of court proceedings, and the publishing of cases via Bailii and other media. Whilst I agree JFF's case had no merit, I do think the later part of the judgement relating to people in court for contempt of it and the direction given that it be published openly is interesting.
    "Family means that no one gets forgotten or left behind"
    (quote from David Ogden Stiers)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (1

      What confuses me is how this appliocation was even Granted.
      How can you issue a writ of habeas corpus when the indicidual has already been sentenced by the court, then released after serving her time

      The mind baffles or am i reading this wrong, How did the application make it past first base, and who paid the substantial court costs assosciated with such a vexatious application??

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (1

        Originally posted by vengence872 View Post
        What confuses me is how this appliocation was even Granted.
        How can you issue a writ of habeas corpus when the indicidual has already been sentenced by the court, then released after serving her time

        The mind baffles or am i reading this wrong, How did the application make it past first base, and who paid the substantial court costs assosciated with such a vexatious application??
        The only costs would be to JFF Ltd since the Secretary for Justice sent no representation. I don't think it was vexatious since clearly they did have valid case law that was referenced. Judge Mumby clearly did not think that the interpretation of it was valid and dismissed whilst giving very much needed advice on openness and transparency on contempt of court in relation to family proceedings.

        You may not be aware but posting pictures of your child on facebook, once they have been adopted, could potentially be classed as contempt of court and birth parents are often threatened with legal action for doing so or for even discussing a court case in family court.
        "Family means that no one gets forgotten or left behind"
        (quote from David Ogden Stiers)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Justice for Families Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] EWCA Civ 1477 (1

          I love barmy cases like this.

          Here's another, no doubt inspired by our "three step process" friends http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/...2011/2270.html

          Comment

          View our Terms and Conditions

          LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

          If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


          If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
          Working...
          X