Half of all court cases over breach of anti-social behaviour injunction end with defendant imprisoned, new data shows

Almost half of all cases concerning civil injunction breaches brought to court by social housing providers and councils since the first lockdown have resulted in a prison sentence, according to a report from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

The Bureau also said it had heard from experts who argued that, in some cases, people with mental health issues were breaking rules set by their civil injunctions that they are "unable to follow".

Civil injunctions were introduced under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. They list things the recipient cannot do or actions they must take. If the person breaks these rules, they are considered in contempt of court, which can lead to a prison sentence.

The Bureau analysed hundreds of court judgments published between 2019 and mid-2022 to create a database of civil injunctions cases.

The research found 11 instances in which a person's mental health issues were explicitly mentioned by the judge who handed down a custodial sentence.

"Several lawyers told the Bureau that the majority of the people they had seen given injunctions did not have the mental capacity to face court, let alone adhere to the rules of the injunction," the report noted.

The Bureau report stated that part of the problem was the lack of assessment in civil courts of defendants' mental health issues.

In the criminal courts, defendants are assessed by an NHS programme which has access to medical records and can identify people who are vulnerable. Civil courts do not have access to this service. However, the Bureau reported that there has been "recent engagement" between the Civil Justice Council and NHS England over piloting the service in civil courts.

The report also claimed that social landlords use civil injunctions as a means of fast-tracking an eviction but with the unintended side-effect of the evicted tenant possibly being sent to prison.

"Since the first lockdown, social housing providers and councils have brought 93 injunction breaches to court, of which 41 ended in the person being sent straight to prison," it said.

The average sentence was found to be 86 days, and some sentences were as short as two weeks.

The Bureau also noted that at some hearings, judges "openly expressed concern that the person's actions had caused no real harm but, given the limited sentencing options for contempt of court, sent them to jail anyway".

A number of cases involving civil injunctions have garnered national media attention. In June of this year, Westminster Council's interim civil injunction, which barred dominoes players from gathering in Maida Hill Market, was found to have been obtained unlawfully.

The Central London Court found that the London council had failed to have due regard to its equalities duties.

Adam Carey