Not paying district court civil case

taim

Hypothetical question:

Say you were taken to court, district court civil case, lost the case and were directed to pay money to plaintiff but did not pay said money, what would be the consequences for you??

source

This would put you in breach of a court order, and a custodial sentence could be put in place by the judge for contempt of court.

TylerIE

Yep, I seen someone arrested, held overnight, and taken to court the next morning for similar...

I don't know the exact details as was there with someone else but they had failed to pay a previous order and the judge didn't take too kindly to it!

Edit: Similar - seemingly not the same > see below....

Reloc8

foinse wrote: »

This would put you in breach of a court order, and a custodial sentence could be put in place by the judge for contempt of court.

Complete nonsense.

Civil Case.

Cannot be jailed for non payment. Anyone who says otherwise should think long and hard about why it is they are posting up 'facts' which are the direct opposite of the actual position.

Consequences could include having the order attached to real property (land) which could then be bought and sold, being made to attend for cross-examination as to your means and made the subject of an order for payment by installments.

lst wrote: »

Yep, I seen someone arrested, held overnight, and taken to court the next morning for similar...

I don't know the exact details as was there with someone else but they had failed to pay a previous order and the judge didn't take too kindly to it!

No you didn't. Not in respect of a civil case. That would be unpossible. Actually perhaps I should enquire first as to when this was.

You may have seen a judge dealing with a person who was given an opportunity to pay compensation to an injured party in a criminal case so as to avoid a jail sentence.

TylerIE

Reloc8 wrote: »

No you didn't. Not in respect of a civil case. That would be unpossible. Actually perhaps I should enquire first as to when this was.

You may have seen a judge dealing with a person who was given an opportunity to pay compensation to an injured party in a criminal case so as to avoid a jail sentence.

It was civil (AFAIK maintenance). The person paid the money in court and was released.

Reloc8

Different circumstances apply - if it was maintenance, that was in connection with Family Law. The OP is talking about losing a case to a civil plaintiff.

I don't know enough about family law to comment on what you describe.

TylerIE

Reloc8 wrote: »

Different circumstances apply - if it was maintenance, that was in connection with Family Law. The OP is talking about losing a case to a civil plaintiff.

I don't know enough about family law to comment on what you describe.

Thanks, for that - glad to learn something new!
I stand corrected. I understood it to be essentially civil so didnt differentiate.

sophia25

In July 09 Judge Lafoy ruled in the McCann case that it was unconstitutional to jail a person for non payment of debt. Up to that point it was possible and many hundreds were jailed annually. After the ruling, the govt. passed a new act dealing with civil debt which clarifies the position. It is now the onus of the creditor to prove that they have the means to pay but won't pay. This in effect means that they must provide income and expenditure details and an installment plan is then ordered based on what the court determines they can afford. If they fail to adhere to this, there still remains the threat of jail as the ultimate sanction.As there is a threat of imprisonment, the debtor also has to have the same protection as a criminal case ie access to legal aid. This complicated things for Family Law cases and for 18 months as a result of confusion around new law, the Courts refused to issue summons for the enforcement of maintenance orders and many children were left without maintenance. This was resolved in Sept with the introduction of a clause in the Civil Law Miscellaneous Provisions. The Courts recommenced dealing with Family Law cases based on the fact that a maintenance order was seen as an installment order as it was court ordered based on what the courts determined could be afforded.

bath handle

That is not quite correct. What laffoy j held was that it was unconstitutional to jail someone who was in breach of an installment order made in their absence. There is confusion in this thread judgement being entered against a person and an order to pay a sum of money. when judgement is entered nothing happens per se. It is up to the plaintiff to seek to enforce the judgement. When an order to pay money is made either by an installment order or as maintenance is made, failure to pay is contempt of court and may be punished by imprisonment.

source

Reloc8 wrote: »

Complete nonsense.

Civil Case.

Cannot be jailed for non payment. Anyone who says otherwise should think long and hard about why it is they are posting up 'facts' which are the direct opposite of the actual position.

I never said the person could be jailed for non payment, I said the person could be jailed for contempt of court, arising out of failing to comply with a court order. In this case an order that payment be made.

drunkmonkey

source wrote: »

I never said the person could be jailed for non payment, I said the person could be jailed for contempt of court, arising out of failing to comply with a court order. In this case an order that payment be made.

What happens if they do get prison for contempt, is the debt absolved or can you continue to chase the debt if you so wish?


sorry didn't want to start a new thread on the same subject.:o