Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“I'm able to do more in the day, which means I'm providing more value to my clients - and it's helped my margins in terms of how much I can bill. LexisNexis is helping me make money.”

ParrisWhittaker

Access all documents on Hadkinson orders

Hadkinson orders meaning

Published by a LexisNexis Family expert
What does Hadkinson orders mean?
A Hadkinson order is the court’s power to refuse to hear, or to hear only on conditions, an application or appeal by a party who is in contempt of court and has not purged their contempt, so as to secure compliance with existing orders. The expression derives from case law (Hadkinson v Hadkinson) and is not statutory. When considering such relief, the court examines whether the respondent is in contempt; whether allowing them to be heard would create an impediment to the course of justice; and whether there is any other effective means of achieving compliance. If conditions are appropriate, the court assesses whether the contempt is deliberate or wilful and whether the proposed conditions (for example, payment, disclosure, delivery up or other steps to comply) are proportionate. The jurisdiction is a remedy of last resort, to be exercised judicially, sparingly and in a manner that avoids injustice; the court must investigate the facts sufficiently to reach a fair and accurate judgment. In England and Wales, applications in family proceedings are made under FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Part 18 (per Assoun v Assoun). The principle is broadly recognised across the UK and Ireland via the courts’ inherent jurisdiction, though the label “Hadkinson...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Hadkinson orders

NEWS
Hadkinson Ordered, Unless Refused: Enforcing LSPOs and Contempt on Appeal in Financial Remedies: Ahmad v Faraj [2025] EWCA Civ 468 (England and Wales): de Gafforj criteria and Mubarak principle

Ahmad and another company v Faraj [2025] EWCA Civ 468 What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment serves as a timely reminder of the range of powers the courts can deploy after a party breaches an order, and the need to calibrate the response between imposing the less severe Hadkinson order and making an unless order. Although both remedies are unusual, the court emphasised that defiance would not be indulged and that these measures would be invoked to secure that any contempt is purged. Notably, even where an unless order could culminate in an appeal being struck out notwithstanding that permission to appeal had been granted (as was a live possibility here), the making of an unless order may still be justified. Lady Justice King concluded that the husband was intentionally in breach, and reaffirmed the approach in Mubarak v Mubarik (Contempt in Failure to Pay Lump Sum: Standard of Proof) [2006] EWHC 1260 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 722: the bare fact that a party...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Family law weekly roundup (England and Wales): public and private children, financial remedies, and Court of Protection—case law, practice guidance updates and alerts

In this issue: Public children Financial provision Private children Court of Protection Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content New Q&As LexTalk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Useful information Public children Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service (SIHIS) for children pilot Three NHS Trusts—Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham Children’s Hospital and Sheffield Children’s NHS Foundation Trust—have received funding to launch pilots and evaluate a new Suspected Inflicted Head Injury Service (SIHIS). The service is designed to tackle delays arising from late and multiple expert medical statements. The trial will assess how this model can drive lasting, system-wide improvements that cut delay, with the pilot scheduled to conclude on 31 March 2025... Anonymisation (Re T (Children: Publication of Judgment)) In Re T (Children: Publication of Judgment) [2024] EWCA Civ 697, [2024] All ER (D) 79 (Jun), the Court of Appeal upheld the mother’s appeal against a decision concerning the publication of a...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
Family law weekly update (England and Wales): AI and the judiciary, Supreme Court junior counsel, tenancy transfer, Hadkinson orders, domestic abuse contact, Hague maintenance recognition

In this issue: Practice and procedure Financial provision Private children International LexTalk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content New Q&As Useful information Practice and procedure CTJ publishes speech by Master of the Rolls on AI The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (CTJ) has released an address by the Master of the Rolls, Sir Geoffrey Vos, concerning artificial intelligence, entitled ‘AI–Transforming the work of lawyers and judges’, delivered at the AI Conference 2024: Transforming the Legal Landscape on 8 March 2024. He distilled the themes from judicial guidance on AI, stressing that anyone considering generative AI must first understand its capabilities and limits. He warned lawyers and judges not to input confidential material into public large language models (LLMs), because such information could, in theory, become accessible to the wider world. When an LLM is asked to summarise or to compose material, the output should be verified before it...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Hadkinson orders

PRACTICE NOTES
Enforcing Family Financial Orders in England and Wales: Procedures, Enforcement Methods, Costs, Interest and Hadkinson Orders

This Practice Note outlines the first matters to weigh up when seeking to enforce a financial order made in family proceedings, setting out the governing rules for each available enforcement route. It further offers direction on orders that can be sought where a party is in contempt, for example a Hadkinson order, and addresses when interest might accrue on a financial order. General principles You may need to enforce all or part of an order arising in financial proceedings; attention must be paid to any leave requirements and limitation periods, see Practice Note: Limitations on enforcement. If a court order partly comprises a recital recording an agreement that imposes an obligation on a party, and partly contains operative terms, the recital can be enforced if the court would have had power to make an order in equivalent terms (H v H (Financial Provision)). By contrast, where the essence of the obligation embodied in the recital is not something the court could have ordered, there is no route to...

Read More Right Arrow