A judge has decided not to punish a 66-year-old homeless handyman who admitted wrongly revealing information about a mentally-ill pensioner at the centre of proceedings in a specialist court where issues relating to people who lack the mental capacity to make decisions are considered.

Mr Justice Williams concluded on Wednesday that Imre Stalter, who lives in a van in the Richmond area of London, was in contempt of court because he had published information in breach of an order made by another judge who was overseeing the woman’s case in the Court of Protection.

He told Mr Stalter not to breach the judges’ order again, but said there was no need to impose any prison term, suspended prison term or fine.

Officials at the Office of the Public Guardian, a Government body set up to protect and help vulnerable people who lack the mental capacity to make decisions, had launched contempt proceedings against Mr Stalter.

They said he had wrongly published information, which identified the pensioner as being a person at the centre of proceedings in the Court of Protection, on more than 20 occasions.

Mr Stalter, a friend of the pensioner, admitted publishing information in breach of an order. He apologised and said the would not publish such information again.

Mr Justice Williams, who is based in the Family Division of the High Court and said the pensioner could not be named, had analysed evidence against Mr Stalter at a hearing in London.

He said that Mr Stalter had become unhappy about what was happening to the pensioner.

“I understand on a human level,” Mr Justice Williams told Mr Stalter.

“But part of the foundation of our society requires people to comply with court orders, even if they feel very strongly that they are unfair.”

He added: “However strongly you feel once you are away from this court, please, I don’t want to see you again in a case like this.”

Barrister Emma Sutton, who represented the Office of the Public Guardian, had told Mr Justice Williams that the case was the first of its kind.

Court of Protection hearings have traditionally been staged in private to protect people at the centre of litigation.

In 2016, judges began hearing cases in public in the wake of secret justice complaints.

Judges overseeing public hearings make orders – called transparency orders – limiting what can be published by any reporter or member of the public.

Miss Sutton said it was the first time anyone had faced contempt proceedings as a result of being accused of breaching a Court of Protection “transparency order” – and the first application of its kind by the Office of the Public Guardian.