Legal News

Contempt—striking out a committal application as an abuse of process on the basis of Henderson v Henderson (Taylor v Robinson)

Contempt—striking out a committal application as an abuse of process on the basis of Henderson v Henderson (Taylor v Robinson)
Published on: 07 April 2021
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Contempt—striking out a committal application as an abuse of process on the basis of Henderson v Henderson (Taylor v Robinson)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: Prior to the changes to CPR 81, Practice Direction 81 set out the four grounds for striking out committal proceedings. In the post-October 2020 landscape, and with Practice Direction 81 revoked, questions have been asked about how the rules on strike out will apply to the new CPR 81. This case confirms that the court has an inherent power to strike out a committal application which it deems to be an abuse of process, and that the power is exercisable notwithstanding the absence of express reference to it in the CPR or in a Practice Direction. In this case, the application was struck out on the basis that the allegations of contempt could and should have been made in an earlier committal application. Failing to do so resulted in the ‘unjust harassment’ of Mr and Mrs Taylor, and was an abuse of process. Written by Alex West, barrister, at Albion Chambers, Bristol. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents