Contempt of Court

[CourtRoomDrama]

I recently won a case - but the other side has failed to pay up and follow through other orders. Is this contempt of court? What do I have to do to get payment and the other issues obeyed?

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Other issues like?

 

How much do they owe? You could send the enforcement agents in?

[callum1999]

I recently won a case - but the other side has failed to pay up and follow through other orders. Is this contempt of court? What do I have to do to get payment and the other issues obeyed?

 

No

 

And what other issues are you wanting to obey??

[Old Cogger]

obeyed = Dictator!

[Old Cogger]

Ask the Banks as they have so many CCJs they have not paid ooppp sorry obeyed!

[CourtRoomDrama]

Not very helpful responses ; (

[Old Cogger]

look if the other person has assets then why have you not applied to have court enforcement officers sent in - cost more monies but if they have then as somebody already stated send enforcement agents in! you are the one using certain word which offends and people hate so cut it out!

[BazzaS]

I recently won a case - but the other side has failed to pay up and follow through other orders. Is this contempt of court? What do I have to do to get payment and the other issues obeyed?

 

1) It isn't contempt of court.

 

2) Getting a judgement is one thing, enforcing it is another. Details will help get you advice.

Is the other side an individual, a company, a limited company?

Do they have assets?.

 

3) What other issues are outstanding, given that you now have a judgement?. Again, without the details it is hard for reliable advice to be given.

Help the respondents here to help you .........

 

Not very helpful responses ; (

 

Better information on which to base advice might allow for more helpful responses.

 

It isn't pointless, but it is "self-help". You have to help people help you.

I could say "send in HCEO's", but for a small judgement for an individual, it might not be the best way forward.

I could say "get an attachment of earnings" but if the debtor is an unemployed individual or a limited company : again, not appropriate advice.

Without details of the debtor (and 'the other issues'), it is guesswork, that may be preventing reliable and more helpful advice being offered.

[steampowered]

There are several options. The best option will depend on the circumstances of the defendant - e.g. are they an individual or a company, are they employed etc.

 

If your judgment is over £600 very often the best method is to use HCEOs to enforce it.

 

Have a read of https://formfinder.hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/ex321-eng.pdf.

[CourtRoomDrama]

In an Order are the recitals enforceable for examples promises on confidentiality or complaints to third parties ?

 

Surely these should be in the Order section? Is the Recitals section just waffle?

[steampowered]

Perhaps tell us what the order actually says and which parts you think have been breached?

[CourtRoomDrama]

How would you interpret this from a Court Order by Consent?

 

"Copies of communications sent to the Defendant's legal advisors and copies of communications made will be

kept in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998."

 

The previous point stated that communications to named individuals would be destroyed. Does the above quote suggest copies of communications to the named individuals will be kept - or just copies to legal advisors?

 

Seems pointless to destroy communications - only to keep copies.

[WarrenBuffet]

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink!

[steampowered]

I agree that it sounds a bit silly to have a provision which says you can destroy correspondence, and then have another provision which says you can keep copies.

 

It would be helpful if you are able to post the exact wording of the rest of the consent order, particularly the bit which talks about destruction of documents.

 

What is the relevance of this? Do you want them to destroy things, if so why?

[CourtRoomDrama]

Section 3 of Court Order

The following staff members of the Defendant will delete and destroy all emails and other communications sent

to and from the Claimant: (it names people)

 

Section 4

Copies of communications sent to the Defendant's legal advisors and copies of communications made will be

kept in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

 

Section 3 is clear

Section 4 is confusing especially the "copies of communications made" bit. Copies of communications to legal advisors or people named in section 3. If latter, it makes no sense!

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

It sounds like parties that shouldn't be holding sensitive data have been ordered to destroy their copies.

All other parties that need to deal with the case can hold the data for as long as necessary in accordance with data protection principles.

Seems straight forward to me.

[steampowered]

Is that the exact wording on the consent order?

 

My reading of the paragraphs you posted is that the Defendant is required to delete communications sent to you, but is permitted to retain communications sent to your legal advisers.

 

I agree with you that the wording is a little bit ambiguous. It is not 100% clear whether the phase "copies of communications made" in section 3 refers to "communications sent to the Defendant's legal advisers" or whether it refers to something else. It seems to me that it refers to "communications sent to the Defendant's legal advisers", but I can't be 100% sure.