Notting Hill Genesis v Sabouh Aziz
[2024] EWCC 15
KL v Manchester City Council & Anor
17 September 2024
[2024] EWCOP 53 (T1)
Court of Protection
A man ignored a court order to leave a house. The court held a hearing without him because he didn't show up and had been given many chances. The court decided the man was in contempt of court and will be sentenced soon. The case was important because of the elderly woman who owned the house and needed him to move.
Key Facts
- •Manchester City Council (MCC) applied for committal proceedings against Michael Adamou (MA) for breaching a court order.
- •The order, an injunction with a penal notice, required MA to vacate the property and not come within 200 meters of it.
- •MA failed to attend the committal hearing.
- •The court considered whether to proceed in MA's absence, referencing Sanchez v Oboz [2015] EWHC 235 (Fam) and P v Griffith [2020] EWCOP 46.
- •The court found that MA had sufficient notice of the hearing and no reasonable excuse for non-attendance.
- •The court found MA in contempt of court for breaching the injunction.
- •The court considered the evidence of Mr. Watson, a process server, and MA's emails.
- •The court found that MA's actions were intentional and that he was in breach of the order.
Legal Principles
Whether to proceed with a committal application in the absence of the respondent.
Sanchez v Oboz [2015] EWHC 235 (Fam); P v Griffith [2020] EWCOP 46
Standard of proof in committal proceedings is beyond reasonable doubt.
OPG v Salter [2018] EWCOP 27
Mens rea in contempt of court: Intention to disobey the order is not required, only that the act was done.
OPG v Salter [2018] EWCOP 27
Overriding objective to deal with cases justly, expeditiously and fairly.
Court of Protection Rules 2017
Outcomes
The court proceeded with the committal hearing in MA's absence.
MA had sufficient notice, no reasonable excuse for non-attendance, and had waived his right to be present. Further delay would prejudice the protected party.
MA was found in contempt of court for breaching the injunction.
The evidence showed that MA had disobeyed the order beyond reasonable doubt, and that he intentionally breached the injunction.
Sentencing hearing scheduled for Friday 20th September at 10:00.
To balance MA's right to a fair hearing with the need to minimize further delay for the 92-year-old protected party.