Where the principal reason for the judge's conclusion that the appellant had breached an injunction was the clear impression she had received of the complainant as a reliable witness, the finding of contempt could not be set aside.Defendant's appeal from the decision of HH Judge Case at Chester County Court on 3 December 2002 to sentence the defendant ('E') to six weeks' imprisonment for breach of an injunction. E's application to purge contempt failed, and E appealed on the basis that he had suffered a missed opportunity to give evidence before the judge to explain conflicts in two affidavits he had made regarding his relationship with his partner and a missed opportunity to cross-examine the complainant regarding the parentage of her children such that a fundamental error was made and, applying R v Clinton (Dean) (1993) 2 AER 998, the finding of contempt should be set aside.HELD: What essentially drove the judge's conclusions was the impression the witnesses had made while testifying. The principal reason for the judge's conclusion was the clear impression she received of the complainant as a reliable witness. The complaints made of counsel related to case presentation decisions.Appeal dismissed.