Committal for Contempt of Court: Jackie Anne Young -v- Nicholas Mark Young

Family CourtCommittal for Contempt of Court

Case Number: 1733-4140-2773-1020

In the Family Court sitting at Derby

14 June 2025

Before:

District Judge Davies

Between:

Jackie Anne Young

-v-

Nicholas Mark Young

Order

DISTRICT JUDGE DAVIES

  1. These are financial remedy proceedings whereby Mrs Jackie Young is the Applicant, and Mr Young, the Respondent. 
  2. I have previously at the last hearing found Mr Young to be in contempt of court.  I gave reasons under the Sanchez case why it was appropriate to deal in his absence. 
  3. Mr. Young accepts today that he is in breach and accepts presumably the finding that he is in contempt of court.  I declined to deal with sentencing at that previous hearing. 
  4. We are a little delayed today due to matters beyond anyone’s control but we are now in a position to deal with matters.  I wanted Mr Young to have the opportunity to seek legal advice if so advised. 
  5. Mr Young has today addressed me with some mitigation.  I will return to that. 
  6. Contempt in this matter was the failure of Mr Young to file a Form E under a penal notice.  He has made no attempt to purge his contempt and made no attempt to contact the court before he attended today. 
  7. He told the court that he has had mental health issues, he has effectively buried his head and found the whole process overwhelming.  He felt he was dealing with the matter with his hands behind his back. 
  8. He does now have his Form E, perhaps partially completed.  He has bank statements but not tax returns. 
  9. When considering the appropriate penalty, I have a range of options, I can send him to prison immediately, I can impose a suspended sentence which is what Mrs Young seeks.  I can impose a fine, or I could confiscate his assets although I note that he states that he is not a man of means at present.  It is also possible to impose no penalty at all. 
  10. I bear in mind that the objectives of sentencing are to ensure future compliance with court orders as there is a need to uphold the authority of the court.  And secondly, to punish the person in contempt for the contempt which has been proven. 
  11. I have to look at how serious the default is.  Court orders and court rules are there to be abided by.  That said there is much to be said for avoiding a custodial sentence given issues with prison overcrowding. 
  12. I do note, and Miss Miller stressed this, that until recently Mr  Young was represented by a solicitor.  Solicitors came off the record just prior to the last hearing.  It is clear today Mr Young has accepted he is in breach of a court order. 
  13. I am persuaded the custody threshold is reached but equally I propose to suspend the sentence of imprisonment.  The terms of suspension will be that by 4pm on 30 June 2025 he must send to Ms Young’s solicitors a fully completed Form E, and where there are missing documents he must make clear on the form which documents he still awaits, from whom, and the timescales by which they will be provided. 
  14.  I consider the appropriate sentence would be one of 14 days imprisonment but as I say suspended as just set out.  I note that Ms Young is only seeking 7 days imprisonment but I think that it would only in reality be 3.5 days in custody should there be a breach. 
  15. That sentence is suspended upon compliance with the completion by Mr. Young of the Form E and sending it to the applicant’s solicitors by the 30th June 2025 at 4pm.  I don’t propose to make it a term of suspension that he also has to file the document with the court by that deadline as there may be FRC portal problems, and if served it will find its way into future bundles. 
  16. That concludes my sentencing judgment.