North Warwickshire Borough Council v William White

For a deliberate breach of a civil injunction, the court may assess culpability and harm by reference to the available sentencing guidance for breaches of Criminal Behaviour Orders, although that guidance does not directly apply. The assessment provides a structured indication of the appropriate sanction. Where culpability is significant but the breach causes little or no real harm, a fine may be appropriate. However, time already spent in custody may constitute sufficient punishment, so that no further penalty is imposed. A separate contribution towards the claimant’s costs may still be ordered.

The claimant alleged that the defendant had breached a civil injunction. The defendant accepted the relevant facts, knew that the injunction was in force, and accepted that his conduct deliberately breached it. The court had to determine whether the breach was proved and, if so, the appropriate sanction and costs order.

1. Breach established. The defendant’s admissions established, so that the court was sure, that he had breached the injunction deliberately.
2. Assessment of seriousness. The court used the sentencing guidelines for breaches of Criminal Behaviour Orders as guidance, while recognising that they did not directly apply to a breach of a civil injunction. The relevant framework required assessment of culpability and harm. Deliberate conduct placed culpability in category B. The little or no real harm caused placed the breach in category 3, producing a B3 assessment.
3. Sanction. The guidance indicated a Community Order, but the court had no power to impose one because the matter was civil and the court was not exercising criminal jurisdiction. A fine was therefore considered the appropriate available sanction. A fine in the region of £700 to £800 would otherwise have been imposed, consistently with the approach taken for a similar breach.
4. Custody already served. The six days spent in custody on remand were considered a more severe penalty than the proposed fine and sufficient punishment for the breach. No further penalty was therefore ordered, and the defendant was released.
5. Costs. The defendant was ordered to pay £250 towards the claimant’s costs within 28 days.