(Mauritius) The applicant appealed three counts of contempt of court, arising from speeches made by him in the political debate. He had been a minister, but was subject to investigation for fraud. To found a appeal he had to show some blatant or significant disregard or breach of legal process, or injustice. The board do not sit as a criminal appeal court.
Held: It was not possible to take any interpretation of some of the words used which did not amount to an attack on the integrity of the judicial system, but other charges were not such an attack.
The Board considered the position and status of a non-statutory inquiry.
Judges:
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Hailsham of St. Marylebone), Lord Scarman, Lord Roskill, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook, Lord Templeman
Citations:
[1982] UKPC 1, [1983] 2 AC 297, (Appeals Nos 4, 5 and 6 of 1981)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ambard v Attorney-General for Trinidad and Tobago PC 1936
It is competent for Her Majesty in Council to entertain appeals against orders of courts of record overseas imposing penalties for contempt of court. . .
Cited by:
Confirmed – S Buxoo and Another v The Queen (Mauritius) PC 19-May-1988
(Mauritius) Mauritius had passed an Act extending rights of Appeal. The Board considered and confirmed that it does not sit as a court of criminal appeal. In order to interfere, there must be something so irregular or so outrageous as to shake the . .
Cited – Regina v Metcalf, Denton, Foster 26-May-2021
Public Inquiry is not In the Course of Justice
(Crown Court at Manchester) A retired solicitor and two retired police officers faced trial charged with doing acts tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice. They were said to have proposed alterations to statements of police . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Constitutional, Contempt of Court
Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.159148