[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Robinson v Clarke [2002] EWCA Civ 1515 (18 October 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/1515.html Cite as: [2002] EWCA Civ 1515

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE EDMONTON COUNTY COURT
(Her Honour Judge Pearce)

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Friday, 18th October 2002

1. LORD JUSTICE MUMMERY: This is an urgent application in relation to committal to prison for alleged breach of a court order. Earlier today, 18th October, Lord Justice Ward granted (assuming that it was necessary to grant it) permission to Mr Nicholas Clarke to appeal against an order of Her Honour Judge Pearce made yesterday, 17th October, directing that Mr Clarke be remanded in custody to Her Majesty's prison for seven days.
2. The order was made on a committal application based on an alleged breach of a non-molestation order. The non-molestation order had been made in the Edmonton County Court on 10th October 2002, on the application of Ms Melanie Robinson, Mr Clarke's former partner. The order was made under Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996. It was alleged in the hearing before Her Honour Judge Pearce that Mr Clarke had acted in breach of the order by threatening violence against Ms Robinson and by intimidating, harassing and pestering her, in consequence of which he was arrested by a police constable under a power of arrest attached to the order. Mr Clarke denied the allegations.
3. The order made by Her Honour Judge Pearce for committal followed a refusal to grant bail, even though there had apparently been some reluctant agreement reached on behalf of Ms Robinson that there should be bail. The application for leave to appeal to this court was made on the ground that the judge had refused to hear submissions on bail and to assess whether Mr Clarke was a suitable candidate for bail. There were other grounds of appeal which I need not detail in this judgment in the events which have happened. Lord Justice Ward directed an urgent hearing for this afternoon of an application for bail pending the hearing of the appeal.
4. At the hearing this afternoon Miss Ojo appeared for the appellant, Mr Clarke, and Mr Archer appeared for Ms Robinson. It appears that the situation is now this. The adjourned hearing of the committal proceedings will be in the Edmonton County Court next Wednesday. There is no objection from Ms Robinson to the principle of bail; and we are informed by Miss Ojo, for Mr Clarke, that he agrees to conditions as to residence, to abiding by a bail condition to observe a curfew from 7.00pm to 7.00am, and to the making of doorstep checks by the East Ham Constabulary to confirm that he is abiding by these conditions. We have also been informed by Miss Ojo that, although it was originally proposed that the residence condition should specify his home address at 50 Allington Avenue, Tottenham N17, he is willing to abide by a residence condition attaching to his mother's address in East Ham, London E6, until the next hearing. The court does not have the full address of Mr Clarke's mother but, subject to that being obtained, an order can be made on the application today that bail be granted to Mr Nicholas Clarke until the next hearing in the Edmonton County Court on Wednesday 23rd October, subject to the conditions of residence at his mother's address (to be notified to the court), abiding by a bail condition to observe a curfew from 7.00pm to 7.00am, and subject to doorstep checks by the East Ham Constabulary to confirm that the appellant is abiding by those conditions. So that is the order we make.
5. That order will be subject to any contrary order made in the meantime, should events occur which require the court to make a different order. Subject to that, it may not be necessary for this appeal to be pursued. It will be a matter for the appellant to decide whether or not to pursue the appeal in the light of events taking place between now and the adjourned hearing in the County Court next Wednesday.
Order: bail granted on conditions as set out above; public funding costs assessment for both parties.