Criminal court's 'inordinate' delays lead to family court hearing committal application

The family court has allowed an application for committal for contempt of court to be brought due to the ‘inability of the criminal court to list a trial within a reasonable time frame’. The trial, over an alleged breach of a non-molestation order, had been relisted for December 2026.

The claimant brought the application after her former partner is alleged to have five breaches of a non-molestation order. The claimant originally complained to the police about the alleged breaches. One is the subject of a criminal prosecution.

The family court judgment, in Lydia Lafronte v Aaron Johnson, said the trial over the alleged breach was listed for 16 October 2024 but vacated ‘due to the inability of the CPS to instruct counsel’ and relisted for 18 October. It was vacated again for the same reason, and relisted for December 2026.

Her Honour Judge Madeleine Reardon added: ‘In those circumstances, not unreasonably, the claimant took the view that she wished to progress with this application and at the last hearing in November 2024 this court, which had until then adjourned the proceedings to give precedence to the criminal trial, agreed and listed this final hearing.’

She added: ‘Faced with inordinate delays in the criminal proceedings, this court took the decision that the contempt proceedings should no longer await the criminal trial and this final hearing was listed.

‘It is unusual for a civil court to hear an application for committal based on the breach of a non-molestation order. That it has happened in this case is due solely to the inability of the criminal court to list a trial within a reasonable time frame.’

The judge found three breaches of the non-molestation order. The defendant was fined £200, payable within 12 months.

In concluding remarks, the judge said: ‘It is unfortunate that the claimant has had to resort to committal proceedings to enforce the breaches of this non-molestation order, solely because the trial date given by the criminal court, where such offences are usually dealt with, was unacceptably delayed (December 2026 is over five years after the first breach was reported to the police). 

‘As it happens the claimant has been able to access public funding to bring these committal proceedings, but that is by no means the norm and many complainants in her position will be unable to do so. A further disadvantage of this route is that the range of sentencing options available to this court is more limited and, in my judgement, less well suited to offences of this nature, than the options available in the criminal court.’