Why Breaching a Family Court Order is Never Worth the Risk: Lessons from the Michael Fuchs Contempt Ruling

The recent High Court finding that billionaire property business person Michael Fuchs is guilty of contempt of court offers a stark reminder of a principle every family law litigant must understand: Court orders are not optional.

Whether a case involves complex international assets or everyday financial arrangements, non-compliance carries serious consequences, including imprisonment.

A High-Profile Example of What Not to Do

In a long running divorce dispute with his former wife Alvina Collardeau-Fuchs, Mr Fuchs was found to have breached two High Court orders made in March 2025.

She alleged that he sold US properties in direct violation of an order prohibiting him from doing so and he also filed legal documents in the US, opposing his ex-wife’s efforts to domesticate English orders, despite a second Order preventing him from taking this step. Mr Fuchs ultimately admitted these allegations.

The actions formed the basis of the contempt application.

This dispute did not arise overnight. As far back as 2022, his ex-wife was awarded more than £28 million in money and assets. Subsequent hearings revealed what the Court described as attempts by Mr Fuchs to frustrate or impede enforcement, even going so far as to rely on what was labelled a sham tenancy agreement to avoid financial obligations.

By October 2025, Mr Justice Poole had already ordered the couple’s £36 million family home to be sold, and criticised Mr Fuch’s evasive approach whilst stating that he had no confident the business man would comply with future orders.

Arguments Rejected: Why That Matters

Although Mr Fuchs admitted breaching the orders, he denied Contempt of Court. His legal team argued that the March 2025 order was invalid due to improper service, and made without jurisdiction, particularly the injunction preventing him from blocking the US domestication. The judge dismissed both points.

Although the order had not been personally served, the Court found that email service had been authorised and repeatedly used and thus constituted good service. The Court also held that any overreach in jurisdiction did not rend the order void nor excuse deliberate non compliance.

In contempt proceedings, the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt. The judge was satisfied that the standard was met.

Contempt of Court: A Serious Legal Risk

The Fuchs case is an important public reminder: breaching as family court order (or any order of the court), whether financial, children related, or relating to property or other matters, is a serious legal offence. Contempt of Court can lead to:

• Imprisonment;
• Fines;
• Seizure of assets or forced sale of assets;
• Adverse costs orders;
• Damage to credibility in all ongoing proceedings.

The Court expects parties to comply fully and promptly, even when they disagree with the terms.

If there is an issue, the correct remedy if there is an issue with an order is to…..

• Apply to vary or discharge the order

….not ignore it, undermine it, or attempt to work around it.

We are Here to Help

If you feel you need legal advice in relation to any aspect of family law, including reviewing court orders, understanding your obligations, or getting help to comply with the terms, please get in touch. Our team can guide you through and ensure you are protected and fully informed of what needs to be done.