Judge not ‘minded to remove’ Hackney chief executive’s name from injunction in leaseholder contempt case

The chief executive of Hackney Council was told by a judge that her witness statement in a contempt of court case was “deeply disturbing”, in the latest development of an ongoing dispute between the local authority and a leaseholder over maintenance works.

Dawn Carter-McDonald was back at Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court on Wednesday (23 September 2026) for the hearing of the committal application brought by leaseholder Thomas Leveritt. The hearing came more than a year after he first applied to have her found in contempt.

The dispute dates back to an order made by District Judge Beecham on 14 March 2025. It required the council to complete repairs to Leveritt’s Penshurst Road flat by 31 May 2025, and it named Carter-McDonald as the person who could be held in contempt if it was not complied with.

The council asked the High Court for an extension the day before the deadline, but this was refused, with Mr Justice Rajah accusing it of taking a “leisurely approach”. The council said in June 2025 that outstanding work had been completed on 5 and 9 June, with the remainder due by 30 June, and later said all the works were finished by the end of that month. Leveritt filed a contempt application in August, arguing the repairs were still unfinished, which the council disputes.

A hearing in October 2025 was adjourned for case management, with District Judge Redpath-Stevens declining to rule on whether Carter-McDonald was in contempt.

Injunction

At the latest hearing, His Honour Judge Roberts declined a request from Carter-McDonald’s counsel to remove her name from the injunction. He told the hearing that he had found the way the case had been handled by her and her counsel “troubling”.

“I find the witness statement of chief executive Dawn Carter-McDonald deeply disturbing,” he said. He also said that her explanation that the council is a “very big organisation” was “wholly irrelevant”.

He took particular issue with her claim that she did not have knowledge of the required works, a point he said had been echoed by the council’s barrister, Edward Blakeney, “as if this is a very good point”.

“It’s a very, very bad point,” the judge said. “If it comes to sentencing, it’s an aggravating factor … She should know all of this.”

No finding of contempt has been made.

Contempt of court is punishable by a fine, confiscation of assets or up to two years’ imprisonment, though this is rare for public bodies such as councils.

Pattern

Describing the council’s conduct throughout the case as “a pattern”, the judge also noted a lack of apology in Carter-McDonald’s communications. He did, however, note that there was a possibility of the parties coming to terms.

The council has previously apologised to Leveritt. In June 2025, Steve Waddington, then Hackney’s strategic director of housing services, told the Citizen: “We apologise wholeheartedly to the resident for the distress and inconvenience this will have caused.”

Settlement talks

As it stands, the two sides are said to be negotiating to settle the entire claim – both the contempt application and the underlying disrepair claim.

Carter-McDonald declined to comment.

Hackney Council has been approached for comment.