Case studies

"Everything at Advocates is done on a timed basis, so we need to conduct our research efficiently. We don't want to charge clients unnecessarily or write off our time. With Lexis products, we can get more research done each day"

Advocates

Access all 1595 documents on Contempt of Court

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

Contempt of Court definition

/kənˈtɛm(p)t/ /ɒv,(ə)v/ /kɔːt/

Published by a LexisNexis Dispute Resolution expert

What does Contempt of Court mean?

Civil contempt is the non-compliance with judgments, orders or other processes of the court (such as making a false statement, failing to comply with a solicitor's undertaking, interfering with the administration of justice, etc). Those found to be in contempt of court can face a fine or be imprisoned.

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Responding to a freezing injunction—checklist

Responding to a freezing injunction—checklist STOP PRESS: On 6 April 2025, amendments to Part 25 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 25) will come into force. For guidance on the changes to Part 25 and Practice Directions 25A and 25B, see Q&A: Where can I find information on the changes to Part 25 coming into force on 6 April 2025? This Checklist provides a suggested approach for dealing with and responding to a freezing injunction. It is intended as a starting point, listing various key matters which you should consider when preparing your response. It is assumed that: • the freezing injunction was granted pre-action and without notice, and • your client is the defendant in the underlying substantive claim For further guidance on freezing injunctions generally, see Practice Notes: • Freezing injunctions—guiding principles • Freezing injunctions—the application • Freezing injunctions—the draft order Ensuring you have all the necessary documentation The applicant should have provided the following documentation (at the very least): • the application notice • the affidavit(s) in...

Issues to consider when completing costs budget—checklist

Issues to consider when completing costs budget—checklist This Checklist considers various issues which may arise when completing a costs budget also known as Precedent H. It takes the form of questions and answers. It should be remembered when completing a costs budget that costs involved in a case will vary depending on the specific circumstances of that case and the issues raised below are, therefore, generic. A link is also provided to a fully interactive Precedent H. General comments Question Response When is there a requirement to file and exchange a costs budget? A costs budget must be completed, filed with the court and served on the other parties in the proceedings unless proceedings are excluded from the costs budgeting rules. Where it is excluded, a costs budget need not be completed unless the court orders otherwise eg the value of the claim is equal or more than £10m. For information, see Practice Note: Costs management and costs budgeting—general principles. Is there a time limit for filing the costs...

Discover our 14 Checklists on Contempt of Court

Absconding and breach of bail conditions in criminal court proceedings

Absconding and breach of bail conditions in criminal court proceedings This Practice Note explains when the court can issue a warrant for arrest and the consequences of failing to surrender to court (absconding) or breaching conditions of court bail. It sets out the procedure for dealing with a defendant following their arrest for breach of bail conditions or failure to surrender, along with the duties imposed on a police custody officer and court officer when facilitating their production at court. The Practice Note: Securities, sureties and other conditions of court bail provides details of the types of bail conditions that can be imposed by the court. For information relating to police bail conditions and failing to surrender to police bail, see Practice Note: Breach of police bail. Bench warrants The Bail Act 1976 (BA 1976) provides that if a defendant fails to appear at court to answer bail, the court may issue a warrant for their arrest. This is called a bench warrant. A defendant who is granted bail by...

Deliberate concealment of planning breaches

Deliberate concealment of planning breaches Overview of enforcement time limits Section 171B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) sets out time limits, after which no enforcement action in respect of a breach of planning control can be taken, unless there has been deliberate concealment of the breach. The time periods are: • for operational development, four years from the date on which the operations were ‘substantially completed’ in Wales and in England where the operations were substantially completed before 25 April 2024, and ten years in England where the operations were substantially completed on or after 25 April 2024 (see Practice Note: Substantial completion and planning enforcement for more information on the legal test for substantial completion) • for breaches of planning control consisting of the change of use of any building to ‘use as a single dwelling house’, four years from the date of the breach in Wales and in England where the breach occurred before 25 April 2024, and ten years...

Discover our 463 Practice Notes on Contempt of Court

Reply (defamation)

Reply (defamation) Claim No.:HQ [insert claim number] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE KING’S BENCH DIVISION ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS LIST PARTIES: (1) [Insert full name of claimant/first claimant] (2) [[Insert full name of second claimant]] [Claimant OR Claimants] and [Insert full name of defendant] Defendant _____________________________________ REPLY _____________________________________ 1 The [Claimant joins OR Claimants join] issue with the Defendant on his Defence save for the admissions it contains and those averments therein which are expressly admitted below. Paragraph references are to the Defence. 2 The [Claimant denies OR Claimants deny OR that the words complained of in the meanings set out at paragraph 8.1 of the Defence are true. Without limitation to the generality of this denial as to the particulars of truth advanced to support those imputations, the [Claimant pleads OR Claimants plead] as follows: 2.1 [set out the claimant’s/claimants’ response to the Particulars of Truth set out by the defendant in his defence, admitting or denying as appropriate]. 3 It...

Particulars of claim for defective hip replacement

Particulars of claim for defective hip replacement Claim No: [Insert] IN THE COUNTY COURT AT [insert location] Between [insert name] Claimant and [insert name] Defendant(s) __________________________________ PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ___________________________________ 1 The Defendant is a manufacturer of medical devices including prosthetic hip implants. 2 The Claimant was fitted with DEFG prosthetic total hip replacement implants (the Implants) to his [left side OR right side] on [insert date] at the [insert] Hospital. On [insert date] the Claimant underwent an x-ray, followed by blood tests which revealed elevated metal ions, and he was advised to undergo revision surgery, undertaken at [insert] on [insert date]. 3 The DEFG System comprised an acetabular implant, a femoral implant and a taper sleeve, each manufactured by the Defendant. The DEFG System was a metal on metal system meaning that all of the components and, in particular, the stem and acetabular cup were both made of metal components. 4 The Implants were designed, manufactured and supplied by the Defendant to another (for the purposes of...

Dive into our 239 Precedents related to Contempt of Court

Where the testator's original Will is missing but there is a copy, and where the identity of the PRs and beneficiaries would be the same under an intestacy, must the copy Will be proved or could the intestacy procedure be followed instead?

Where the testator's original Will is missing but there is a copy, and where the identity of the PRs and beneficiaries would be the same under an intestacy, must the copy Will be proved or could the intestacy procedure be followed instead? This Q&A assumes that the testator's Will is simply missing or has accidentally been destroyed rather than there being any questions as to it having been revoked or as to its validity. Given that it is known that there is a Will, it would be incorrect to proceed on the grounds of intestacy. The procedure for applying for a grant of representation is different where there is a Will. The personal representatives would not be able to complete the statement of truth and would risk contempt of court. This Q&A refers you to the

What steps can be taken to enforce a specific issue order?

What steps can be taken to enforce a specific issue order? The method of enforcement to be employed in relation to a specific issue order is very much dependent on the nature of the order itself and on the facts of the case. Certain methods of enforcement will not be appropriate for particular orders. The court's primary objective is ordinarily to secure the effective operation of any order, and therefore, some measures that may be taken are not concerned with a formal enforcement procedure but rather are directed to securing the effective operation of the order. When considering how to achieve effective cooperation with a specific issue order measures that may be taken range from those which are in the least interventionist category, to those procedures which can result in the wholesale reconsideration of the substantive order and/or the possible imprisonment of the party in breach. In an appropriate case, the court might consider making an order for further directions. Where for example there is a lack of...

See the 88 Q&As about Contempt of Court

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—27 March 2025

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the 182nd Practice Direction update and the Court of Appeal decision in Expert Tooling and Automation Ltd v Engie Power Ltd (commissions and informed consent); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

Ruling on specific disclosure applications, transcripts: privilege and redactions (Clarke v Guardian)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The court has dismissed two disclosure-related applications by Noel Clarke at the outset of his libel and data protection trial against The Guardian. The claimant sought: (1) disclosure of the defendant's certified transcripts of audio files, and (2) the removal of redactions made, according to the defendant, to protect confidential journalistic sources. The judge held that transcripts of non-privileged conversations cannot be privileged, even when produced for litigation purposes, but nevertheless declined to order disclosure where it was not necessary for the fair disposal of the trial. She also refused the redactions application, where the claimant had plainly failed to establish convincingly that it was necessary to override the important public interest, in the interests of justice, in protecting journalistic sources. Written by Isabella Piasecka, managing associate and Sam Clare, trainee solicitor at Mishcon de Reya LLP.

Read the latest 805 News articles on Contempt of Court