“Return the vehicle.” “Stop interfering with the complainant’s garden.” “Remove the fence.” District Courts make such orders under section 22, and the question that follows is what happens when they are ignored. The answer is in one short provision, and it depends on how the order was drawn.
The provision
Where a Court orders the doing of an act other than the payment of a fine or sum of money or costs and directs that, in case of the defendant’s neglect or refusal to do the act, he shall be imprisoned, and the defendant neglects or refuses to do the act, the Court or a Magistrate may issue a warrant of commitment for the imprisonment of the defendant for such time as the conviction directs.
The Magistrates’ Manual identifies this as the provision that enforces “such things as interim orders in the nature of injunctions, as well as final orders for the delivery of a thing or for some other act”. Everything turns on the words “and directs”: the order must itself state that non-compliance will be punished by imprisonment, and for how long.
Why the direction is needed
The Manual states that District Court magistrates do not have the inherent power to punish for contempt that National and Supreme Court judges have, so the consequence of disobeying an order “must derive from a specific statutory source”. Section 277 deals only with misconduct in the face of the Court. That leaves section 171. An order that says “the defendant shall deliver the vehicle to the complainant within 7 days” and stops there cannot be enforced by imprisonment; the complainant would have to come back to Court, and the Court, being functus officio, could not add the direction afterwards. See contempt in the District Court.
Drafting the order
| Element | Example |
|---|---|
| The act, precisely described | “deliver up the Toyota Hilux registered number ABC 123 to the complainant at the Kokopo Police Station” |
| The time for compliance | “on or before 4 pm on 30 September 2026” |
| The direction under s 171(1)(b) | “and in default of compliance the defendant shall be imprisoned for 14 days” |
| For an order to refrain from doing something | “the defendant shall not enter Allotment 5 Section 12 … and in the event of breach shall be imprisoned for 14 days” |
| For an order to deliver goods, the alternative value | “or in default of delivery pay the complainant K3,500, the value of the goods” |
The term of imprisonment is fixed by the Court in the order, and section 171 gives no maximum, but the sentencing limits and constitutional proportionality apply; a term of days or weeks is the norm. A party asking for the order should ask for the direction expressly.
Issuing the warrant
On the defendant’s neglect or refusal, the Court or a magistrate may issue the warrant of commitment. Because the consequence is loss of liberty, the defendant must be shown to have neglected or refused, which means service of the order and proof of non-compliance, and the defendant should be given the chance to explain; Constitution section 42(1)(c) permits detention for failure to comply with a court order securing a non-contractual obligation, and natural justice requires a hearing. Section 172 lets the Court postpone the warrant on conditions, which is the mechanism for giving a defendant a last chance. Section 87 governs conveyance to the institution.
Orders for delivery of goods
An order for the delivery of goods detained without just cause has a second enforcement route. Section 192(1)(d) and (e)(iv) allow the imprisonment of a person who has neglected or refused to comply with an order for delivery of goods after due notice and has not paid the value of the goods to the party aggrieved; the order under section 192(3) is for up to two months unless the value is paid. See imprisonment of debtors. Where the order fixed an alternative value, that sum is a money order enforceable by execution under section 173.
Orders with their own machinery
| Order | Enforcement |
|---|---|
| Possession of premises under the Summary Ejectment Act | Warrant under s 3(3) of that Act directing the police to enter and give possession within 30 days |
| Family protection order | Breach is an offence under s 20 of the Family Protection Act 2013: K10,000 or three years |
| Restriction of movement under s 205B | Breach is an offence: six months |
| Community work under s 199A | Two days’ imprisonment for each day of default |
| Recognizance to keep the peace | Forfeiture under s 217; commitment for refusing to give it under s 214 |
| Witness ordered out of court under s 63 | Offence under s 277(1)(d) |
Where one of these applies it should be used in preference to a bare order under section 22, because the enforcement is prescribed and does not depend on the drafting of the order.
When the District Court is not enough
An order that needs to be enforced by committal for contempt, against a company, or against a person who will simply serve the days and carry on, is a National Court matter. The National Court’s contempt jurisdiction, and its power under Constitution section 155(4), give it tools the District Court lacks; see contempt of court.
The District Courts Act is not on PacLII; it is available on vLex.
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the District Courts Act (Chapter 40) and check for later amendments. The Act is not on PacLII; the figures and time limits quoted in this series come from the consolidation to No 8 of 2000, and the District Courts (Amendment) Act 2009 changes some of them once it is brought into operation. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.