The applicant defendant’s enquiry agent was prevented by officers responsible to Detective Superintendent Dale from identifying and interviewing potential witnesses for trial who might support his alibi. When the agent had sought to show a photograph of the applicant to people at a hostel, he was prevented from doing so by police officers because of possible prejudice to an identification parade, and at the instigation of the police he was refused access to the hostel or its residents.
Held: It was a contempt for a police inspector to prevent defence solicitors from completing their proper enquiries. The police officer was quite unable to establish that the investigation would constitute an interference with the Police’s own activities under the 1964 Act. No further action was taken upon the respondent undertaking to take no further steps to interfere.
Balcombe LJ said: ‘The relevant principles of law can be stated in the following propositions. (1) It is a contempt of court to engage in any conduct which involves an interference with the due administration of justice either in a particular case or, more generally, as a continuing process . . (2) Interference with witnesses or potential witnesses by threat, promise or subsequent punishment is a contempt: R v Kellett, Attorney General v Butterworth. In our judgment, the concept of interference with witnesses extends to interference with proper and reasonable attempts by a party’s legal advisers to identify and thereafter interview potential witnesses. There was no case cited to us in which that precise form of conduct had previously been found to be a contempt, but we bear in mind the observation of Lord Denning MR in Butterworth’s case, at p. 719, that in such a case the general principle of protecting proceedings from interference should prevail, and the further emphasis of that point by Sir John Donaldson MR in Attorney General v Newspaper Publishing plc. (3) Interference with a solicitor in the discharge of his or her duties can also constitute a contempt of court . .’
Judges:
Balcombe LJ, Buxton J
Citations:
Times 13-Jul-1995, [1996] QB 120, [1995] 3 WLR 786, [1996] 1 Cr App R 200, Independent 27-Jul-1995, [1996] 1 All ER 224
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Versloot Dredging Bv v Hdi Gerling Industrie Versicherung Ag and Others ComC 8-Feb-2013
The defendants had engaged an expert witness, and he had undertaken investigations at the claimant’s premises. The claimant now sought an injunction to restrain the defendants from preventing the expert talking to them independently of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contempt of Court, Police
Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79449
