Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) >> Jabbal v Jabbal (Sentence) [2015] EWFC B10 (12 January 2015)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2015/B10.html
Cite as: [2015] EWFC B10
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Case No: KT14F00454
IN THE FAMILY COURT
SITTING AT KINGSTON-UPON-THAMES
St James Road,
Kingston upon Thames,
Surrey KT1 2AD
Date: Monday, 12th January 2015
Before:
DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN SMART
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:
|
|
JABBAL |
Applicant |
|
|
- and - |
|
|
|
JABBAL |
Respondent |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE PARTIES appeared in person
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SENTENCE
Digital Transcription by Marten Walsh Cherer Ltd.,
1st Floor, Quality House, 6-9 Quality Court
Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1HP.
Tele No: 020 7067 2900, Fax No: 020 7831 6864, DX: 410 LDE
Email: info@martenwalshcherer.com
Website: www.martenwalshcherer.com
DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN SMART:
1. Please sit at this stage. Mr Jabbal, you have admitted breaching the terms of the order which I made on 31st July 2014 which prohibited you from returning to [an address]. In doing so you broke the terms of a suspended sentence of imprisonment which I imposed on you on 14th August 2014, [2014] EWFC B189. What you admitted was that you went back to that address and broke a window on 7th December 2014. You have also admitted breaking the terms of the same order that I made on 13th December 2014 by returning to [an address] at 1.15pm. You have pleaded guilty in the South West London Magistrates Court at Wimbledon for certain breaches of the non‑molestation order which I made against you on 4th June 2014 but I do not sentence you for such breaches, that will be a matter for the magistrates. You were remanded in custody by the magistrates.
2. I bear in mind that the occupation order that I made was granted for the protection of your wife, the applicant, and indeed your children and you were ordered to leave the family home in light of drunken, abusive behaviour which was established before me at a hearing at which you were represented by the duty solicitor. You broke the terms of the order almost immediately.
3. On the first occasion on which you were arrested, I imposed no penalty. That was on 4th August 2014 and it was accepted at that hearing that you had received the order that was actually made at the hearing.
4. It was on the second occasion that you were arrested that I decided to impose a suspended sentence for 28 days' imprisonment with a view to you complying with the order for the period stated for the suspension, that is to say until 14th August 2015. You admitted on that occasion returning to [an address] at 5.15 on 5th August 2014 and at 09.15 on 6th August 2014.
5. I have to mark the court's disapproval of your disobedience to its orders and seek to secure compliance with the order in the future. I have borne in mind a decision of the Court of Appeal Hale v. Tanner [2000] 3 FCR 62. I have also borne in mind by analogy the Sentencing Guidelines Council guideline on sentencing for ‘Breach of a Protective Order’.
6. I bear in mind that you were not violent towards the applicant on any of the occasions with which I am concerned and that what you did may well have been contributed to by your upset at having to leave your home and family. However, you do not seem to understand that your behaviour is upsetting to your wife and you seem unwilling or unable to control your behaviour. Smashing windows is unacceptable, as is returning to this property in breach of the court's order.
7. You have today admitted the allegations made against you and you have apologised to your wife but it is, in my judgment, only a custodial sentence that is justified.
8. Would you please stand, Mr. Jabbal. The sentence of the court is that, first, the 28‑day sentence passed on you on 14th August 2014 will now be put into immediate effect. For the breach of my order on 7th December 2014 you will be committed to prison for contempt of court for 13 weeks. For the breach of my order on 13th December 2014 you will be committed to prison for contempt of court for 28 days. Having regard to the totality of the sentences passed upon you it seems just in the circumstances to make these sentences run concurrently. You will serve 13 weeks.
‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ ‑