Tweet
Prest v Prest [2015] EWCA Civ 674 (07 July 2015)
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/714.html
On 29th July 2014, in the course of extended proceedings between a former husband and wife, Mr Justice Moylan granted a judgment summons brought by the wife under the Debtors Act 1869, s 5. He held that the husband was wilfully in default of a maintenance order in the sum of £360,200. The judge imposed a penalty of 4 weeks imprisonment, but suspended that term provided that the husband paid the total amount found to be in default within a period of 3 months, ending on 28th October 2014. It is against that determination that the husband now appeals to this court. The appeal is brought as of right under the Administration of Justice Act l960, s 13, without the need for permission to appeal.
On 29th July 2014, in the course of extended proceedings between a former husband and wife, Mr Justice Moylan granted a judgment summons brought by the wife under the Debtors Act 1869, s 5. He held that the husband was wilfully in default of a maintenance order in the sum of £360,200. The judge imposed a penalty of 4 weeks imprisonment, but suspended that term provided that the husband paid the total amount found to be in default within a period of 3 months, ending on 28th October 2014. It is against that determination that the husband now appeals to this court. The appeal is brought as of right under the Administration of Justice Act l960, s 13, without the need for permission to appeal.
- The background to these proceedings is extensive and, indeed, is well known to those who practise family law, in consequence of an earlier sequence of appeals which brought the case before the Supreme Court (Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd. [2013] UKSC 34; [2013] 2 AC 415). However, as the point in this appeal relates, narrowly, to the enforcement of the ultimate judgment, it is not necessary to do more than sketch out the basic background chronology.
