1 / 13

CONTEMPT OF COURT

CONTEMPT OF COURT. ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law’ Art 6 ECHR. VARIETIES OF CONTEMPT.

grace
Download Presentation

CONTEMPT OF COURT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONTEMPT OF COURT ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law’ Art 6 ECHR

  2. VARIETIES OF CONTEMPT • Strict Liability Contempt • Deliberate Contempt (Common law Contempt) • Inquiring into Jury deliberations • Disobedience of a court order • Scandalising the court (Murmuring Judges)- abolished this year

  3. PURPOSE OF CONTEMPT • To preserve the integrity of the court and legal process rather than safeguarding the dignity of the court. • ‘The law of contempt is based on the broadest of principles, namely that the courts cannot and will not permit interference with the due administration of justice. It’s application is universal.’

  4. Scandalising the Court • ‘Justice is not a cloistered virtue. She must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny & respectful, even though outspoken, comment of ordinary men’. • Considered for abolition in 1981 Contempt of Court Act but kept in --- in case! • See Paul Dacre attacks on Mr Justice Eady • See Re Aamer Anwar SHJ 2008 para 2 (in Crook) • Peter Hain case (May 2012)

  5. THE LAW COMMISSION • This section of Contempt law under review by the Law Commission • Consultation closed 5th Oct 2012 • Report due as soon as possible • Crime & Courts Act 2013 abolished ‘Scandalising the court’ as an offence • WHOLE area of Contempt law under review by LC. Report due 2014.

  6. STRICT LIABILITY CONTEMPT • Created by Contempt of Court Act 1981 • No need to prove intent to secure conviction • Examples: publishing defendant’s previous convictions • Publishing certain details of criminal trials • Publishing defendant’s photograph • Current ‘problems’ – internet/tweeting/mobile phones

  7. SOME RECENT CASES • Re MGN’s Application [2011] EWCA Crim 100 s.4(2) order – 3 trials - stabbing • Att-Gen v MGN Ltd [2011] EWHC 2074 (Admin) – Jo Yeates Landlord arrest • Att-Gen v Associated Newspapers & News group [2011] EWHC 418 [Admin] – online pictures of accused

  8. THE CRITERIA • Prosecution must show: • There is a publication • It must create a substantial risk that the course of justice in particular proceedings will be seriously impeded or prejudiced • The proceedings are ‘active’

  9. ‘substantial risk of serious prejudice’ • What does ‘substantial’ mean? No positive definition – mostly negative – ‘not insubstantial’, ‘not minimal’, ‘a risk….not merely remote’ • main concern is the effect of material on the jury and the possible verdict. • Judges considered to be immune BUT some cases have been brought in respect of reporting appeal trials

  10. SOME CONSIDERATIONS • The medium used – TV, national newspaper, local newspaper? • Once a substantial risk is made out the prosecution must show the effect will be SERIOUS. • See the 10 Guiding principles from Att-Gen v MGN & Others [1997] • Hat Trick Productions Case (Maxwell)

  11. ACTIVE PROCEEDINGS • What is ‘active’? Examples: If a person is arrested A warrant has been issued for arrest Summons has been issued Person charged orally Inquest has been opened

  12. DEFENCES • 1. FAIR & Accurate & contemporaneous reporting of legal proceedings - no malice • 2. Innocent distribution OR publication – note differences • Distribution – requires an honest belief that material not in contempt • Publication – not as wide – burden on publisher • 3. Discussion in good faith on public affairs (s.5)

  13. DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS • An important defence introduced prior to the Act in 1979 – Thalidomide case • ‘A publication made as or as part of a discussion in GOOD FAITH of public affairs is not to be treated as contempt of court under the strict liability rule if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion’ • Burden of proving ‘bad faith’ falls on prosecution.

More Related