Nwogbe v Nwogbe
A provision in an occupation order requiring the respondent to pay the rent and outgoings cannot be enforced by committal, which exposed a gap in the Family Law Act 1996.
Facts
The court made an occupation order under the Family Law Act 1996 excluding the husband from the matrimonial home, and, under section 40 of the Act, ordered him to pay the rent and other outgoings on the property. He failed to pay, and the wife applied to have him committed to prison for contempt.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that there was no power to enforce an order under section 40 by committal or by any other procedure, because the Act did not provide a means of enforcement, and the Debtors Act 1869 prevented imprisonment for a debt of this kind. The court said that this was a serious gap in the legislation, which meant that the power to order a respondent to pay the outgoings was of little practical use, and drew it to the attention of Parliament.
Related cases on domestic abuse and occupation orders
- B v B (Occupation Order) [1999] 1 FLR 715
- Chalmers v Johns [1999] 1 FLR 392
- F v M [2021] EWFC 4
- G v G (Occupation Order: Conduct) [2000] 2 FLR 36
- Re H-N and Others (Children) (Domestic Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448
- Re L (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); Re V; Re M; Re H [2001] Fam 260
- Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2015] UKSC 2, [2015] AC 1732
- Opuz v Turkey (2010) 50 EHRR 28
Studying family law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
