Tag: Contempt of Court

Delaney v Delaney: CA 2 Nov 1995

A County Court judge has no power to imprison a contemnor pending a sentence decision. Time spent in custody awaiting trial for contempt would not automatically be set off against the final sentence. Proceedings for contempt can be restored after sentence so that consideration could be given to whether the contemnor had purged his contempt. Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘the enforcement of orders is the prime object and the personal circumstances of the contemnor are a relatively minor consideration’.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR differentiated contempts in the face of the court, saying: ‘I should make absolutely plain that in the course of his submissions Mr Munby put entirely on one side contempts in the face of the court. Those are the subject of special provisions in the lower courts, section 118(1) of the County Court Act 1984 governing the position in the county court and section 12(1) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 governing the position in the magistrates’ court. A power has long been exercised by the superior courts to detain those committing or apparently committing contempts in the face of the court until the rising of the court on the day of the alleged contempt and there is no reason to doubt the existence of that inherent power. It has, however, no bearing on the present situation which was not such a contempt’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Balcombe LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 27-Nov-1995, Times 02-Nov-1995, [1996] QB 387

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 14(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Sevketoglu v Sevketoglu CA 21-Aug-2003
The appellant had broken two court orders, and appealed a sentence of two months imprisonment. He had been held on remand for 28 days before the court hearing.
Held: The judge should have given allowance for the time spent in custody already. . .
Cited – Balli, Re Contempt of Court Act 1981 (No. 2) ChD 15-Jul-2011
The defendant litigant had been found guilty of contempt in the face of court and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. The contemnor now sought to purge his contempt.
Held: The sentence had been imposed as punishment and not to seek to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.79888

Templeton Insurance Ltd v Thomas and Another: CA 5 Feb 2013

The court was asked whether goodwill was to be regarded as an asset in the context of an asset freezig order. A third party company was subject to such and they were said to have broken the order by the purchase at an undervalue of the company business. They now argued that such a sale was not the disposal of an asset within the order.
Held: The appeal failed. The fact that goodwill is an intangible makes it no less an asset than other intangibles, such as choses in action.

Judges:

Rix, Black, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Darashah v UFAC (UK) Ltd CA 1982
A Mareva order had been obtained. The order explicitly included goodwill as an asset of the company, but the defendant argued still that it was not covered as an asset for the injunction.
Held: The court rejected the assertion.
Lord . .

Cited by:

Cited – JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov SC 21-Oct-2015
The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470803

Taylor and Taylor v Ribby Hall Leisure Limited and North West Leisure Holdings Limited: CA 6 Aug 1997

In supervisory proceedings against lawyers, claims of abuse of process are to be pursued at the substantive hearing and not by way of pre-emptive applications. Delay in bringing an application to enforce a solicitor’s undertaking can be relevant to the exercise of the discretion to enforce it summarily.

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Hutchison LJ, Mummery LJ

Citations:

Times 06-Aug-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2220, [1998] 1 WLR 400

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Myers v Elman HL 1939
The solicitor had successfully appealed against an order for a contribution to the other party’s legal costs, after his clerk had filed statements in court which he knew to be misleading. The solicitor’s appeal had been successful.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Angel Solicitors v Jenkins O’Dowd and Barth ChD 19-Jan-2009
Actions were brought to enforce undertakings given by solicitors to redeem mortgages on the sale of properties, and as to redemption figures provided by lenders who then refused to release the properties. The solicitors had replied to standard form . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.89734

Attorney-General v Newspaper Publishing Plc and Others: CA 2 May 1997

A third party was in contempt of court if the proceedings had been significantly, and adversely, affected. It was not necessary that they had been frustrated entirely.
‘The law of contempt is of ancient origin yet of fundamental contemporary importance . . Essentially a creature of common law, contempt has been and continues to be developed and adapted to meet continuing challenges to the ‘supremacy of the law’. One result of this continuing development and concern to protect the many facets of the administration of justice is that there are many forms of contempt’.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ

Citations:

Times 02-May-1997, [1998] Ch 333, [1997] 1 WLR 927

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General v Fraill and Another CACD 16-Jun-2011
Juror’s use of Facebook was contempt
The court considered whether a juror had committed contempt of court. She had communicated with a defendant via Facebook, despite explicit warnings not to use the internet.
Held: Both juror and defendant in the trial had committed contempt of . .
Cited – Hutcheson v Popdog Ltd and Another CA 19-Dec-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction to prevent the defendant publishing private materials regarding him. That injunction had been continued by consent but was no challenged by a third party news publisher.
Held: Leave to appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.77990

Hudson v Hudson: CA 23 Mar 1995

The defendant withdrew and spent pounds 20,000 in breach of a Mareva injunction
Held: A sentence of nine months imprisonment was not excessive for a flagrant breach of matrimonial court order.

Citations:

Ind Summary 18-Apr-1995, Times 23-Mar-1995, [1996] 1 FCR 19

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick and Others ChD 13-Nov-2006
The court considered the punishment on finding contempt proved for breach of a freezing order: ‘In contempt cases the object of the penalty is both to punish conduct in defiance of the court’s order as well as serving a coercive function by holding . .
Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.81514

Attorney-General v British Broadcasting Corporation; Same v Hat Trick Productions Ltd: CA 11 Jun 1996

The mention of a case on a television programme remained a contempt of court, despite the humorous context given to the remarks in the broadcast.
Auld LJ said: ‘The degree of risk of impact of a publication on a trial and the extent of that impact may both be affected, in differing degrees according to the circumstances, by the nature and form of the publication and how long it occurred before trial. Much depends on the combination of circumstances in the case in question and the court’s own assessment of their likely effect at the time of publication. This is essentially a value judgment for the court, albeit that it must be sure of its judgment before it can find that there has been contempt. There is little value in making detailed comparisons with the facts of other cases.’

Judges:

Auld LJ

Citations:

Times 26-Jul-1996, [1997] EMLR 76

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attorney-General v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 1986
When considering a complaint of contempt of court against a newspaper, it should be recognised that any criminal trial, by its very nature, causes all involved in it to become progressively more inward looking, with the capacity to study the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General v Random House Group Ltd QBD 15-Jul-2009
The Attorney-General sought to restrain the publication of a book which she said would prejudice the defendants in a forthcoming criminal trial. The publisher said that a restraint would be a disproportionate interference in its Article 10 rights. . .
Cited – Attorney General v Associated Newspapers Ltd and Another Admn 3-Mar-2011
Complaint was made that the defendant newspapers were in contempt of court in publishing on their respective web-sites showing the defendant in the criminal trial brandishing a gun, and claiming that he was boasting of his involvement.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.77984

Harrow London Borough Council v Johnstone: CA 31 Mar 1995

A local authority was denied a possession order against a Husband when the Wife who had been excluded from the property by a court order surrendered the tenancy.

Citations:

Times 31-Mar-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – London Borough of Harrow v Johnstone HL 13-Mar-1997
A possession action was lawful against a remaining joint tenant after a notice to terminate the tenancy had been given by the other tenant. An order against interference with possession of property did not extend to matters of the duration of the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – London Borough of Harrow v Johnstone HL 13-Mar-1997
A possession action was lawful against a remaining joint tenant after a notice to terminate the tenancy had been given by the other tenant. An order against interference with possession of property did not extend to matters of the duration of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Housing

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.81268

Cleveland County Council v L and Others: CA 14 Mar 1996

There should be no imprisonment of a contemnor without a formal and proper penal notice having first been served.

Judges:

Lord Justice Russell, Lord Justice Hirst and Lord Justice Peter Gibson

Citations:

Times 08-Apr-1996

Statutes:

Rules of the Supreme Court Order 45, rule 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.79218

Jones v Jones: CA 19 Mar 1993

H appealed against his sentence of six months imprisonment for contempt of court in breaching a non-molestation order.
Held: Whilst Ansah could not be used to establish a principle that imprisonment for contempt should be a last resort only, the sentence here could be reduced to three months. The use of committal orders in contempt cases in family proceedings need not necessarily only be in the last resort.

Judges:

Russell, Simon Brown LJJ, Sir Michael Fox

Citations:

Times 23-Mar-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ansah v Ansah CA 1977
Ormrod LJ: ‘Orders made ex parte are anomalies in our system of justice which generally demands service or notice of the proposed proceedings on the opposite party: see Craig v Karssen [1943] KB 256, 262. Nevertheless, the power of the court to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Contempt of Court

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.82606

In Re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2): CA 8 Jul 1993

An employer was not liable for its employee’s action in contempt of court against the company’s clear instructions with regard to anti-competitive agreements.

Citations:

Times 08-Jul-1993, Independent 14-Jul-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Director General of Fair Trading v Smiths Concrete: re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete 1992
For a person to be found in contempt of a court order it is necessary to show that that he knew of the relevant order and with that knowledge he intended to do the act which amounted to a breach of the court order. It is not necessary to show that . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Director General of Fair Trading v Pioneer Concrete (UK) Ltd, sub nom Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2) HL 25-Nov-1994
The actions of company employees, acting in the course of their employment and in contempt may put the company employer in contempt also, and even though the company may have given explicit instructions that no infringing agreement should be entered . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Contempt of Court, Commercial

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.82208

In R B (Minors) (Wardship: Power to Detain): CA 24 May 1994

A wardship court may not order the detention of a person after an arrest without a finding first of contempt.

Citations:

Times 24-May-1994, [1994] 2 FLR 479

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Zakharov and Others v White and Others ChD 28-Oct-2003
The defendant challenged a bench warrant issued out of the Chancery Division for his arrest. He said the lack of any written procedure made it non-compliant with his human rights, and a warrant could not be issued without a finding of contempt.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Contempt of Court

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.81611

Caribbean General Insurance Co Ltd v Frizzell Insurance Brokers: CA 4 Nov 1993

The judge was wrong to re-instate a case after there had been repeated breaches of unless orders by the plaintiff. Peremptory orders of the court must be obeyed unless excusable.

Citations:

Gazette 19-Jan-1994, Times 04-Nov-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Caribbean Gold Ltd v Alga Shipping Ltd (The Nova Scotia) QBD 2-Jun-1993
The time for service of a writ was extended after an excusable error by solicitors. The writ had been issued but the guidance given had been confusing. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Caribbean Gold Ltd v Alga Shipping Ltd (The Nova Scotia) QBD 2-Jun-1993
The time for service of a writ was extended after an excusable error by solicitors. The writ had been issued but the guidance given had been confusing. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.78901

Burton v Winters: CA 2 Jun 1993

The defendant’s garage had encroached by one brick’s width on the plaintiff’s land and had been built in 1975. The plaintiff obtained a declaration that that was the position in 1990 but was refused the mandatory injunction which she sought. The plaintiff would not accept this conclusion and she trespassed on, and interfered with, the defendant’s garage and land. The defendants obtained an injunction to restrain her from doing so, but she continued, and she was the subject of an application for committal for contempt, and she was committed for contempt for a period of two years. She appealed.
Held: She had not been entitled to use self help. Self help was wrong in a complicated case, but abatement is available in simple cases where the abatement would remove the nuisance and the cost of legal proceedings could not be justified. Self help to overcome a trespass by encroachment could rarely be justified.
Lloyd LJ discussed the relevant principles of self help: ‘Ever since the assize of nuisance became available, the courts have confined the remedy by way of self-redress to simple cases such as an overhanging branch, or an encroaching root, which would not justify the expense of legal proceedings, and urgent cases which require an immediate remedy. Thus, it was Bracton’s view that where there is resort to self-redress, the remedy should be taken without delay. In Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book III, chapter 1, we find: ‘And the reason why the law allows this private and summary method of doing one’s self justice, is because injuries of this kind, which obstruct or annoy such things as are of daily convenience and use, require an immediate remedy; and cannot wait for the slow progress of the ordinary forms of justice.’
The modern textbooks, both here and in other common law jurisdictions, follow the same line: see Salmond and Heuston on Torts, 20th ed. (1992) p. 485; Clerk and Lindsell on Torts, 16th ed. (1989) p. 36; Fleming, The Law of Torts, 7th ed. (1987), p. 415 and Prosser and Keeton, The Law of Torts, 4th ed. (1971), p.641. In Prosser and Keeton we find: ‘Consequently the privilege [of abatement] must be exercised within a reasonable time after knowledge of the nuisance is acquired or should have been acquired by the person entitled to abate; if there has been sufficient delay to allow resort to legal process, the reason for the privilege fails, and the privilege with it.’
. . And: ‘In my opinion, this never was an appropriate case for self-redress, even if the plaintiff had acted promptly. There was no emergency. There were difficult questions of law and fact to be considered and the remedy by way of self-redress, if it resulted in the demolition of the garage wall, would have been out of all proportion to the damage suffered by the plaintiff.’ As to the refusal of the mandatory injunction he said: ‘Self redress is a summary remedy, which is justified only in clear and simple cases, or in an emergency.’

Judges:

Anthony Lloyd LJ

Citations:

Gazette 02-Jun-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1077, [1993] 3 All ER 847

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Moffett v Brewer 1848
Greene J said: ‘This summary method of redressing a grievance, by the act of an injured party, should be regarded with great jealousy, and authorised only in cases of particular emergency, requiring a more speedy remedy than can be had by the . .

Cited by:

Applied – Chamberlain v Lindon Admn 18-Mar-1998
The appellant challenged the dismissal of his private prosecution of the defendant in destroying a new garden wall. The magistrates had found a lawful excuse in that the defendant said that the wall had been constructed to obstruct his private right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Torts – Other, Land

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.78775

Regina v Lewis and others: CACD 4 Nov 1999

A judge should usually consider retiring to his chambers when faced with a disturbance in his court. Such events occurring in his absence are less likely to lead to misjudgments about how the matter should be dealt with and can often defuse a situation.

Citations:

Times 04-Nov-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88536

Regina v Selby Justices, ex parte Daltry: QBD 1 Dec 2000

If a court laid a charge of contempt of court, legal aid should normally be granted to the defendant. It was wrong, first to hear representations which led to the charge of contempt being withdrawn, and then to decide that legal aid should not be granted because it was no longer necessary. The effect of this practice would be that legal aid would only be available for sentence for contempt. Contempt is a potentially serious matter and a defendant will generally require representation.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-2000, Times 01-Dec-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Contempt of Court

Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.88000

Newspaper Publishing Plc and Others: CACD 25 Apr 1997

The AG sought punishment for the publisher, editor and a journalist of the Independent for contempt of court.
Held: Dismissed

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Latham, PooleJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Crim 987, [1997] 1 WLR 926, [1997] 3 All ER 159

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.573349

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others: ComC 6 Oct 2010

The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment.

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2458 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd ComC 17-May-2005
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others ComC 25-May-2007
Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another ComC 17-Jun-2008
Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .

Cited by:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal ComC 21-Oct-2010
The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants. . .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 5-May-2011
The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.425312

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal: ComC 21 Oct 2010

The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants.

Judges:

David Steel J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2640 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd ComC 17-May-2005
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others ComC 25-May-2007
Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another ComC 17-Jun-2008
Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 6-Oct-2010
The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 5-May-2011
The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.425386

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others: ComC 5 May 2011

The applicant, and judgment creditor sought orders for committal for contempt by the defendant companies and officers after failing to comply with court orders.

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1024 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd ComC 17-May-2005
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd CA 24-Oct-2005
The defendants who were resident in Greece appealed a decision that the English court had jurisdiction over them, by virtue of a close connection of the matter with earlier proceedings heard here.
Held: The fact that the defendants were all . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 28-Jul-2006
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International UK Ltd and Another ComC 14-Mar-2007
Judgment on quantum. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and others ComC 25-May-2007
Application for an order to prevent some defendants pursuing action in other jurisdictions. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 11-Jul-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 20-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another CA 4-Apr-2008
The court was asked whether the Commercial Court had international jurisdiction to make an order for the appointment of a receiver by way of equitable execution, and a freezing order, in relation to the judgment debtors’ interest in the concession . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 23-May-2008
Application for interpretation of a receivership order. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another (No 3) CA 6-Jun-2008
The court was asked whether the English court has jurisdiction following judgment to grant an anti-suit injunction against foreign judgment debtors (one of whom has a domicile in a Brussels I Regulation State) restraining them from pursuing . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International (UK) Ltd and Another ComC 17-Jun-2008
Application for further order of payment of costs of action on account. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and others CA 28-Jul-2008
The judgment creditor appealed an order refusing to oblige the defendant company to attend court and provide information about its means. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another ComC 21-Oct-2008
The court heard matters relating to the recovery by the claimant of $63,000,000. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and others CA 13-Nov-2008
The creditors sought leave to appeal against orders made in the course of proceedings to recover a very substantial debt from a foreign resident company. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors (Oil and Gas) Company Sal CA 6-Feb-2009
Appeal from order with regard to management of receivership. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Others ComC 6-Oct-2010
The third respondent sought to strike out an application for his committal for failure to comply with orders made in support of proceedings to enforce a substantial judgment. . .
See Also – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal ComC 21-Oct-2010
The court held a case management conference with regard to an intended application for committal for contempt of one of the defendants. . .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 21-Jan-2011
. .
See Also – Consolidated Contractors International Company Sal and Another v Masri CA 3-Feb-2011
. .
See Also – Masri and Another v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others ComC 3-Mar-2011
On notice hearing with regard to without notice receivership order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.434893

Newson-Smith v Al Zawawi: QBD 21 Jul 2017

Judges:

Whipple J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1876 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Al Zawawi v Newson-Smith QBD 27-Oct-2016
Defendant’s, having been told that the Master hearing their case found their evidence to date unreliable, applied to him to recuse himself. He refused and the parties now appealed from his refusal of that application.
Held: The appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 25 September 2022; Ref: scu.591312

Bishop of N v Earl of Kent: 1500

Jurors were fined both for disobedience to the orders of the judge and also for discussions by one of them about the case they were trying with an external party

Citations:

[1500] YBT 14 Hen 7 pl 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General v Fraill and Another CACD 16-Jun-2011
Juror’s use of Facebook was contempt
The court considered whether a juror had committed contempt of court. She had communicated with a defendant via Facebook, despite explicit warnings not to use the internet.
Held: Both juror and defendant in the trial had committed contempt of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.446110

JSC BTA Bank v Solodchenko and Others: ChD 17 May 2011

The claimant applied to commit a defendant to prison for contempt of court for failure to comply with the disclosure provisions in an international freezing order served personally on him in Cyprus. After service of the freezing order and the substituted service of the committal application, he had made no response, either by communicating with the Bank or with the court, or by instructing legal representatives to do so. He had not attended nor offered any excuse for not doing so.

Judges:

Briggs J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC B11 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.440233

JSC BTA Bank v Solodchenko and Others: ChD 5 Apr 2011

The court was asked whether the seventeenth defendant, Mr Anatoly Ereshchenko, should be ordered to attend for cross-examination in respect of his purported compliance with a disclosure order made against him.

Judges:

Henderson J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 843 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.431757

JSC BTA Bank v Solodchenko and Others: ComC 22 Sep 2010

Application by the claimant bank, to commit the second defendant for contempt of court constituted by breach of provisions of an order requiring him to disclose his assets and to provide answers to questions listed in the order.

Judges:

Proudman J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2404 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425821

Absolute Living Developments Ltd v DS7 Ltd and Others: ChD 5 Jul 2018

Allegation of seven breaches of freezing order by one defendant.
Held: Marcus Smith J summarised the law that applies to establish that there has been a contempt of court by virtue of the breach of such an order: ‘(1) Of critical importance is the order that is said to have been breached. As has been seen, the order generally must bear a penal notice,[23] must have been personally served on the defendant,[24] and must be capable of being complied with (in the sense that the time for compliance is in the future).[25] Additionally, the order must be clear and unambiguous.[26]
(2) The breach of the order must have been deliberate. This includes acting in a manner calculated to frustrate the purpose of the order.[27] A difficult question relates to what ‘deliberate’ means. It is not necessary that the defendant intended to breach the order, in the sense that he or she knew its terms and knew that his or her conduct was in breach of the order. It is sufficient that the defendant knew of the order and that his or her conduct in response was deliberate as opposed to inadvertent . .
(3) Deliberate breach of an order, in the sense described, is very significant. It is clearly in the public interest that court orders be obeyed.
(4) The standard of proof, in relation to the allegation, is to the criminal standard, that is beyond all reasonable doubt.’

Judges:

Marcus Smith J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1717 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Spectravest Inc v Aperknit ChD 1988
The parties had disputed the use of a Puss-n-Boots design motif used on garments. The defendant had undertaken to surrender goods using the motif, and not to further infringe the plaintiff’s copyright. Later the defendant had obtained legal advice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.618984

Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick and Others: ChD 13 Nov 2006

The court considered the punishment on finding contempt proved for breach of a freezing order: ‘In contempt cases the object of the penalty is both to punish conduct in defiance of the court’s order as well as serving a coercive function by holding out the threat of future punishment as a means of securing the protection which the injunction is primarily there to do.’ and ‘So far as the penalties are concerned, first, the court may impose an immediate custodial sentence limited to a two-year maximum. A person committed to prison for contempt of court is entitled to unconditional release after serving half of the sentence. A committal order is appropriate where there is serious contumacious flouting of orders of the court.’

Judges:

Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3087 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pospischal v Phillips CA 20-Jan-1988
Where property was sold, and assets dissipated in breach of a Mareva injunction, an immediate prison sentence was necessary to both protect the plaintiff and punish the defendant. However, the court substituted a sentence of six weeks’ imprisonment . .
See Also – Crystalmews Ltd (in Liquidation) v Metterick and others ChD 25-Oct-2006
Freezing orders had been made in the course of winding up proceedings after the company was found to have been involved in VAT fraud. Applications were made for the committal of defendants for breach of the freezing orders. . .
Cited – Hudson v Hudson CA 23-Mar-1995
The defendant withdrew and spent pounds 20,000 in breach of a Mareva injunction
Held: A sentence of nine months imprisonment was not excessive for a flagrant breach of matrimonial court order. . .
Cited – Aquilina v Aquilina CA 24-Mar-2004
The applicant appealed a sentence of six months imprisonment for breaches of a non-molestation injunction.
Held: The breaches had been non-violent, and the court had not considered whether he was prepared to purge his contempt. A balance had . .
Cited – Hale v Tanner CA 22-Aug-2000
When attaching a power of arrest on a non-molestation order the court should consider attaching it only to that element which restricts violence or proximity rather than to any part relating to harassment. When considering sentence for a breach, the . .
Cited – Gulf Azov Shipping Company v Idisi CA 2001
The defendant was found to have committed a serious breach of a freezing injunction.
Held: A committal order is appropriate where there is serious contumacious flouting of orders of the court. The sentence imposed was three months suspended on . .
Cited – M (Children) (Contact Order) CA 11-Apr-2005
Where a contemnor sould be fined but would be unable to pay a fine at the level thought appropriate, that was not a good reason to impose imprisonment. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408557

Blue Sky One Ltd and Others v Blue Airways Llc and Others: ComC 1 Feb 2010

The court gave reasons for holding one defendant in contempt, and debarring them from taking part, having failed to comply with a grounding order for one of the aircraft at issue.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 128 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Contract, Contempt of Court

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396472

Grosvenor Chemicals Ltd and Others v UPL Europe Ltd and Others: ChD 26 Jul 2017

Application under CPR r81.14(1) for permission to bring proceedings for committal for interference with the administration of justice. That is covered by Section III of CPR Part 81 (r81.12 to r81.14). The interference relied on is the use of documents disclosed in an action for a collateral purpose, contrary to CPR r31.22

Judges:

Birss J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1893 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.591242

Broadmoor Hospital v Hyde and Another: QBD 4 Mar 1994

A non-disclosure order was not necessary to found an application for contempt where the applicant had not made any personal enquiries as to the existence of such an order.

Citations:

Independent 04-Mar-1994, Times 18-May-1994

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.78666

Associated Newspapers Ltd v United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Nov 1994

The newspaper said that a finding against it of contempt of court for publishing material derived from a jury’s deliberations infringed its rights of free speech.
Held: The complaint was declared inadmissible. ‘The Commission agrees with the applicants that the fines imposed in the present case amounted to an interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression, and also agrees that the interference was ‘prescribed by law’. In connection with the question whether the interference pursued a legitimate aim, the Commission finds, as indeed the applicants accept, that the aim was to maintain the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. It would add that the term ‘judiciary’ comprises the entire machinery of justice, including the proper functioning of the jury system (cf., Euro. Court H.R., Sunday Times judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 34, para. 55). It is an important element of that system that jurors should express themselves freely in the jury room without fear of outside disclosure of their views and opinions. To this extent the law may also serve to protect the rights of individual jurors themselves.
. . In connection with the legislation as such [the 1981 Act], the Commission notes that the jury system in the United Kingdom is founded on the premise that jurors will express themselves freely in the jury room in the knowledge that what they say will not be used outside. If a juror thought that what he said could subsequently be made public, it is possible that he would bear in mind the future use to which his words might be put, and not just the case in hand. The unlimited prohibition on disclosure is then seen to be an inevitable protection for jurors and can therefore be regarded as ‘necessary’ in a democratic society which has decided to retain this particular form of jury trial.’,br />The Commission added that it was not called on to assess the compatibility of section 8 with article 10 in circumstances involving a conviction for research into jury methods as such, and stated: ‘The present case relates rather to revelations of the jury’s deliberations in one specific case of considerable public interest, including statements by the jurors concerned about the opinions and attitudes of other members of the jury. The applicants were well aware that the information they published was sensitive, and should have been aware that its disclosure could put other individual jurors in an invidious position.
The Commission finds, in the circumstances of the present case, that the interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression did not take the State beyond the margin of appreciation which it enjoyed.’

Judges:

Mm A Weizel P

Citations:

24770/94, [1994] ECHR 58

Links:

HUDOC, Bailii

Citing:

Appeal from – HM Attorney-General v Associated Newspapers Ltd and Others HL 4-Feb-1994
Following the acquittal of a prominent politician on a charge of conspiracy to murder, the New Statesman magazine published an article, based on an interview with one of the jurors, which gave an account of significant parts of the jury’s . .
At First Instance – HM Attorney General v Associated Newspapers Ltd and Others QBD 9-Dec-1992
A newspaper was held to have been in contempt of court for publishing details of the deliberations of a jury, even though it had not solicited the information. Beldam LJ said of the word ‘disclosure’: ‘It is a word wide enough to encompass the . .

Cited by:

Cited – HM Attorney General v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd Admn 13-May-2009
The first defendant had been foreman of a jury in a criminal trial. He was accused of disclosing details of the jury’s votes and their considerations with concerns about the expert witnesses to the second defendant. The parties disputed the extent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.343072

In Re Swaptronics Ltd: ChD 24 Jul 1998

A party who was in contempt of court should not be debarred from continuing to take a proper part in a court action unless that contempt was serious enough seriously to interfere with the fair conduct of the trial. ‘The courts need powers of punishment with which to enforce their orders. The ones they have at present are adequate. They ‘do not need a power which deprives the litigant of his right to litigate. Indeed it seems to me that were the courts to refuse to allow those in contempt access to the courts simply on the grounds that they are in contempt, they could well be acting in breach of the provisions of Article 6.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights which entitles everyone to the determination of his civil rights by means of a fair and public hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal. The ‘everyone’ in that Article is not subject to an exception in respect of people who are guilty of serious offences or contempt of court.’ and ‘Sir Robert Megarry’s Miscellany-at-Law records that in 1631 a litigant who threw a brickbat at a judge, but missed, had his right hand chopped off and nailed to the gibbet on which he was thereafter hanged in the presence of the court. I am not sure what would have happened to him had his aim been better.’

Judges:

Laddie J

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-1998, Gazette 23-Sep-1998, [1998] All ER (D) 407

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hadkinson v Hadkinson CA 1952
The courts adopt an approach similar to that of the United States courts where there has been a significant contempt on the part of a party to litigation. Denning LJ said: ‘Those cases seem to me to point the way to the modern rule. It is a strong . .

Cited by:

Cited – Motorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and others (No 2) CA 12-Jun-2003
World-wide freezing orders had been made under the 1982 Act. The defendants were members of a Turkish family with substantial business interests in the telecommunications industry. In breach of orders made in the US some defendants had sought to . .
Cited – Polanski v Conde Nast Publications Limited CA 11-Nov-2003
The claimant sought damages for defamation. He feared arrest and extradition to the US if he came to England, and was granted an order allowing him to give evidence by video link. The defendant appealed that order.
Held: There was no absolute . .
Cited – Arrow Nominees Inc, Blackledge v Blackledge ChD 2-Nov-1999
The applicants sought to strike out a claim under section 459. The two companies sold toiletries, the one as retail agent for the other. They disputed the relationship of the companies, and the use of a trading name. Documents were disclosed which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Human Rights

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.82214

Attorney General v Random House Group Ltd: QBD 15 Jul 2009

The Attorney-General sought to restrain the publication of a book which she said would prejudice the defendants in a forthcoming criminal trial. The publisher said that a restraint would be a disproportionate interference in its Article 10 rights.
Held: The court considered the proper reluctance to restrain an anticipated contempt of court.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1727 (QB), [2010] EMLR 9

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10, Contempt of Court Act 1981 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 3) CA 1992
To found a complaint of contempt the risk arising from the publication must be practical rather than theoretical or illusory. Publicity concerning a named defendant before a jury during the jury trial of another charge did not give rise to a serious . .
Cited – Leary v Britiah Broadcasting Corporatin CA 29-Sep-1989
Lord Donaldson MR considered an application for an injunction to prevent a publication which it was said would create a contempt of court, and said: ‘I am very concerned that no one should think that on a speculative basis you can go to the courts . .
Cited – Attorney General v MGN Limited CA 1997
There had been, over some years, ‘saturation coverage’ of the relationship between a television personality and her boyfriend. Disclosures were made about his violence and his previous convictions. He came to be arrested and charged with a serious . .
Cited – Attorney-General v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 1986
When considering a complaint of contempt of court against a newspaper, it should be recognised that any criminal trial, by its very nature, causes all involved in it to become progressively more inward looking, with the capacity to study the . .
Cited – Attorney-General v English HL 1981
The risk of impediment or prejudice to a trial from a publication has to be assessed at the date of publication. ‘Substantial risk’ in section 2(2) means a risk which is more than remote. Lord Diplock said: ‘Next for consideration is the . .
Cited – Attorney General v Independent Television News and Others CA 1995
Leggatt LJ said that counsel for the Attorney General was correct when he submitted that: ‘It does not follow that because a risk had been created by the broadcast, further publication in newspapers would not create fresh and added risk of . .
Cited – Attorney General v MGN Limited CA 1997
There had been, over some years, ‘saturation coverage’ of the relationship between a television personality and her boyfriend. Disclosures were made about his violence and his previous convictions. He came to be arrested and charged with a serious . .
Cited – Attorney-General v British Broadcasting Corporation; Same v Hat Trick Productions Ltd CA 11-Jun-1996
The mention of a case on a television programme remained a contempt of court, despite the humorous context given to the remarks in the broadcast.
Auld LJ said: ‘The degree of risk of impact of a publication on a trial and the extent of that . .

Cited by:

Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contempt of Court, Human Rights

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.376265

Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others: ChD 2 Jul 2007

Application was made for the committal to prison for contempt of court by the first defendant for breaches of court orders.

Judges:

Henderson J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1508 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Application from – Lexi Holdings v Luqman and others CA 6-Aug-2007
Application for permission to appeal – granted. . .
Appeal from – Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others CA 29-Aug-2007
Claim by valuers on administration of mortgage company for sums paid to the company by lenders to pay for valuations. . .
See Also – Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others ChD 19-Oct-2007
. .
See Also – Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others ChD 16-Nov-2007
. .
See Also – Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others ChD 15-Jan-2008
Whether a prisoner serving a sentence for contempt of court is subject to the same rules as to early release etc as other prisoners.
Held: ‘paragraph 5.2 of PSO 6300 is unlawful in so far as it purports to require, or is interpreted by the . .
See Also – Lexi Holdings v Luqman and Another ChD 16-Jul-2008
. .
Cited – Shah v Patel and others CA 15-Aug-2008
The appellant had been committed after failing to file evidence with the registrar after, in the insolvency of the company, another director had filed false evidence to explain missing funds. However the order had required the documents to be filed . .
See Also – Lexi Holdings Plc v Luqman and others CA 26-Feb-2009
Attempts by company administrators to recover sums allegedly misapplied by former directors. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.254488

Re B ( A Minor)(Contempt: Evidence): FD 6 Dec 1995

The lack of an obligation on an alleged contemnor to testify did not mean that he could avoid providing an affidavit.

Citations:

Gazette 06-Dec-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re S-C (Children) v H-C CA 28-Jan-2010
The appellant appealed against an order finding her in contempt of court for breach of a court order. The finding had been made in the absence of the parties. She had reported to the police a distorted version of a medical report in the children . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.85718

M (Children) (Contact Order): CA 11 Apr 2005

Where a contemnor sould be fined but would be unable to pay a fine at the level thought appropriate, that was not a good reason to impose imprisonment.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 615, [2005] 2 FLR 1006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 14.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick and Others ChD 13-Nov-2006
The court considered the punishment on finding contempt proved for breach of a freezing order: ‘In contempt cases the object of the penalty is both to punish conduct in defiance of the court’s order as well as serving a coercive function by holding . .
Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Contempt of Court

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226140

Santiago v Regina: CACD 8 Mar 2005

The defendant had been convicted but refused to leave his cell to attend court to be sentenced. The judge had adjourned a hearing on contempt for seven days.
Held: The judge was under no duty to hear any allegation of contempt on the day. Previous authorities had established that urgency was material not to the jurisdiction but to whether and how it should be exercised. Where the delay was no longer than was necessary to make adequate arrangements for a summary trial, that delay was not unlawful. ‘The effect of Balogh is that a judge should not punish summarily unless it is ‘imperative for the court to act immediately’, unless ‘nothing else [would] do to protect the ends of justice’ and unless the defendant was being punished to ‘ensure that a trial in progress or about to start can be brought to a proper and dignified end’.

Judges:

Hooper LJ, Silber J, David Paget QC

Citations:

Times 16-Mar-2005, [2005] EWCA Crim 556

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Balogh v St Albans Crown Court CA 1975
The defendant, a solicitors’ clerk attending a trial, grew bored, and set out to release laughing gas into the court through a vent. He had been seen earlier and was caught before he achieved his end. He appealed his committal; for contempt, saying . .
Cited – Regina v Griffin 1989
The court considered the extent of the jurisdiction to commit for contempt. Mustill LJ said: ‘We should add that certain dicta (for example, in Balogh) may be read as suggesting that the court has no jurisdiction to adopt the summary process unless . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223635

SA v Nsongo and Others: FD 13 Feb 2014

Application for the committal of Brunel Nsongo and Christopher Nsongo (otherwise known as Christopher Yamba), for contempt of court. The application arises out of an application for contact brought by SA for contact with his daughter JN.

Judges:

King DBE J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 337 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.523779

Regina v Tamworth Justices Ex Parte Walsh: QBD 3 Mar 1994

The peremptory committal of a solicitor for an insult was wrong. Alternatives were available.

Citations:

Times 03-Mar-1994, [1994] COD 277

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Haw and Another v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court Admn 12-Dec-2007
The defendants appealed convictions for contempt of court, on the basis of having wilfully interrupted the court. The respondent said that no appeal lay.
Held: The statute was ambiguous, and ‘there can be no good reason why a person convicted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.88146

Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli: QBD 14 Aug 1995

An applicant, who was HIV positive, wished his identity to be concealed.
Held: Some publicity had already occurred A Contempt of Court anonymity order was not to be used to protect a litigant’s privacy.

Judges:

Latham J

Citations:

Times 14-Aug-1995, [1995] 7 Admin LR 840

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte T, a Firm of Solicitors Admn 25-Jun-1997
The firm of solicitors making an application for judicial review of the decision of the Board to institute criminal proceedings against them sought anonymity, saying that procedure which might prove them innocent would nevertheless damage their . .
Cited – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors) CA 10-Jun-1998
Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders
A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome.
Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.88298

Derrick Burgess, Chris Furbert, Sinclair Smith and Orin Simmons v Stevedoring Services Limited: PC 15 Jul 2002

PC (Bermuda) An injunction had been granted requiring the trade union to cease industrial action. The action was settled, but the injunction was not released. Later, there were furthe rdisputes, and committal was sought.
Held: The later action taken was in the nature of an industrial dispute of the sort restrained. The trade union, by the decisions of its officials and meetings prescribed by the rules, had power to decide not to comply with its collective obligations. But it had no power on behalf of its members to decide that they would not comply with their individual obligations. That was a matter for them. Although the action was a breach, the way it had been enforced without proper notice, and after such a delay was an abuse of process, and the injunction should be discharged.

Citations:

[2002] UKPC 39

Links:

PC, PC, Bailii, PC

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

Cited – Secretary of State for Employment v ASLEF (No 2) CA 1972
Railway employees had been instructed by their unions to ‘work to rule’ and more specifically to ban overtime, Sunday and rest day working. ‘Working to rule’ meant giving an unreasonably literal construction to certain requirements of the railway . .
Cited – Lloyds Bowmaker Ltd v Britannia Arrow Holdings Plc CA 1988
It is the duty of a plaintiff who has obtained an interlocutory injunction to proceed to trial and not simply to sit back and rely upon the injunction until such time as the defendant moves to discharge it. The court have stressed the importance of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179170

Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1155): 1 Dec 1846

A party, who knows of a null or irregular order, should apply to discharge it. Whilst such an order is in existence it must not be disobeyed.

Citations:

[1846] EngR 1155, (1846) 1 Coop T Cott 338, (1846) 47 ER 884

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer 24-Jul-1846
The plaintiff’s solicitor obtained an attachment against the defendant in default of a pleaded defence, disregarding a court order extending the period for filing the defence, which he considered to be a nullity. The order in question had been . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer 19-Nov-1846
A party in contempt may give a notice of motion, although he cannot move until the contempt of court is cleared. With referance to clearing contempt the answer must be taken be sufficient until exceptions are actually allowed.
Moving upon the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1154) 1-Dec-1846
An order of the court of which the party affected by it has notice, though not formally served upon him is not to be disregarded or treated by him as a nullity, however certain it may be that the order is erroneous, and would, upon a proper . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer 9-Feb-1848
Where an action is referred by an order at nisi prius this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the certificate of the referee or the judgment entered to pursuant thereto, on any ground on which it would not have such jurisdiction if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.303050

Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1154): 1 Dec 1846

An order of the court of which the party affected by it has notice, though not formally served upon him is not to be disregarded or treated by him as a nullity, however certain it may be that the order is erroneous, and would, upon a proper application for that purpose be discharged

Citations:

[1846] EngR 1154, (1846) 2 Ph 113, (1846) 41 ER 884

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer 24-Jul-1846
The plaintiff’s solicitor obtained an attachment against the defendant in default of a pleaded defence, disregarding a court order extending the period for filing the defence, which he considered to be a nullity. The order in question had been . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer 19-Nov-1846
A party in contempt may give a notice of motion, although he cannot move until the contempt of court is cleared. With referance to clearing contempt the answer must be taken be sufficient until exceptions are actually allowed.
Moving upon the . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1155) 1-Dec-1846
A party, who knows of a null or irregular order, should apply to discharge it. Whilst such an order is in existence it must not be disobeyed. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer 9-Feb-1848
Where an action is referred by an order at nisi prius this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the certificate of the referee or the judgment entered to pursuant thereto, on any ground on which it would not have such jurisdiction if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.303049

Miller and Another v Scorey and Others: ChD 2 Apr 1996

Using disclosed documents in second action with similar parties may be a contempt, depending significantly upon whether any undertaking, express or implied was given. The court struck out an action where proceedings were commenced in reliance on documents produced on discovery in an earlier action, where the consent of the court had not been obtained prior to the commencement of the second action.

Judges:

Rimer J

Citations:

Times 02-Apr-1996, [1996] 1 WLR 1122

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Preston Borough Council v McGrath CA 12-May-2000
The defendant had been investigated for fraud against the claimant. He had disclosed documents to the police, but now complained at their use in the civil proceedings against him.
Held: The document had not been given to the police under . .
Cited – Di Placito v Slater and others CA 19-Dec-2003
The parties had earlier compromised their dispute, with the claimant undertaking not to lodge any further claim unless he did so within a certain time. They now sought to commence action.
Held: When considering whether to discharge such an . .
Cited – Jones, Re (Alleged Contempt of Court) FD 21-Aug-2013
The Solicitor General sought the committal of the respondent for alleged contempt of court. There had been repeated litigation between the respondent and her former husband as to whether the children should live in Spain with the father or in Wales . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.83722

Harris v Harris: CA 8 Nov 2001

On an application by a contemnor to be purged of his contempt, the judge could only answer ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘Not Yet.’ It was not right to add further complexity to release the contemnor, but with some further part of his sentence suspended. The powers of the court in such applications need to be clear and simple.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Mantell

Citations:

Times 19-Nov-2001, Gazette 10-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1645, [2002] Fam 253, [2002] 1 All ER 185, [2001] 3 FCR 640, [2002] Fam Law 93, [2002] 2 WLR 747, [2002] 1 FLR 248

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Overruled – Harris v Harris; Harris v Attorney General FD 21-May-2001
The applicant had been committed for ten months for contempt, being in breach of family court injunctions. He applied to be released after two months on the basis that the unserved balance of the sentence be suspended. The court held that it had the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Family

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166836

Griffin v Griffin: CA 7 Apr 2000

It was not wrong to make an order suspending commitment for contempt of court provided he complied with another order which had been made without any limit of time. The power to commit remains a common law power with statutory restrictions. An order can be valid and within the judge’s discretion even if it is one which should not normally be made.

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-2000, Gazette 18-May-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 119

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Contempt of Court

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147152

Regina v Schofield: CACD 1993

After the jury’s verdict, a juror asked the bailiff if the jury could have asked a question, and on receiving an affirmative response, the juror went on to say that the jury had not understood the offence of affray and had written a note to that effect. Such a note was found in the jury room, and the court was invited to consider what transpired between the juror and the bailiff, but the argument was rejected on the ground that to give any meaning to that conversation it would be necessary to lift the veil of secrecy from the jury room and enquire what had happened within.

Citations:

(1993) CLR 217

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v BM and Another CACD 9-Dec-1996
A message was offered to one of the solicitors acting for a defendant from a relative of a juror after the trial.
Held: Rules against hearing of jury deliberations are wider than Contempt of Court Act. The court refused to commence any Young . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.183499

D v D (Access: Contempt: Committal): CA 9 Nov 1990

An order granting custody did not require a person to or abstain from a particular act, and could not therefore be the source of a comittal for contempt of it.
Orse ; Dempster v Dempster

Citations:

[1991] 2 FLR 34, Independent 09-Nov-1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re S-C (Children) v H-C CA 28-Jan-2010
The appellant appealed against an order finding her in contempt of court for breach of a court order. The finding had been made in the absence of the parties. She had reported to the police a distorted version of a medical report in the children . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.396469

M v P (Contempt of Court: Committal Order): CA 1992

Orse Butler v Butler
Failure to observe the proper procedures for service is not necessarily fatal to the lawfulness of a committal order. In each of the two appeals against committal orders comma the contemnor complained of non-compliance with the rules of service. In the first, the order had been served by the court rather than served personally by the applicant. In the second the contemnor complained that contrary to order 29 rule 115 no order had been served on him and that it was on the wrong court form.
Held: dismissing the appeals. A failure to observe proper service procedures was not necessarily fatal to the lawfulness of the order; the court exercising it’s discretion under Section 13(3) of the 1960 Act, had to take into account the interests of those affected by the content and the need to maintain its authority. Since neither contemnor had suffered injustice the orders would stand despite the irregularities.
Lord Donaldson of Lymington said: ‘In all contempt cases, justice requires the court to take account of the interests of at least three categories of person, namely, (a) the contemnor (b) the ‘victim’ of the contempt and (c) other users of the court for whom the maintenance of the authority of the court is of supreme importance. The interests of the alleged contemnor require that he should have the right to be informed of the charges which he has to meet, to be advised and represented if he so wishes (subject to his being eligible for legal aid or otherwise able to finance his defence), to be given a full and fair opportunity of meeting those charges and, if found guilty of contempt of court, to be informed in sufficiently clear terms of what has been found against him. In all these cases the court has been concerned to ensure that these fundamental requirements are met in the way in which, particularly in the case of the county courts, they are intended to be and should be met. However, we have tended to overlook the fact that they may in some circumstance be met in other ways. Whilst this court should always be quick to identify and condemn any departure from the proper procedures, the interests of the victim and of maintaining the authority of the courts require that in deciding what use to make of its powers under section 13(3) of the Act of 1960 this court should ask itself whether, notwithstanding such a departure, the contemnor has suffered any injustice. It does not follow that he has, nor does it follow that the proper course is to quash the order. If he has not suffered any injustice the committal order should stand, subject if necessary to variation of the order to take account of any technical or procedural defects. In other cases it may be possible to do justice between the parties by exercising the court’s power under section 13(3) by making ‘such other order may be just.’ If the circumstances are such that justice requires the committal order to be quashed amongst the options available is that of ordering a retrial . .’
Lord Donaldson held: ‘In all contempt cases, justice requires the court to take account of the interests of at least three categories of persons, namely, (a) the contemnor (b) the ‘victim’ of the contempt and (c) other users of the court for whom the maintenance of the authority of the court is of supreme importance.’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR

Citations:

[1993] Fam 167, [1992] 4 All ER 833, [1992] 3 WLR 813

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Dictum Approved – Nicholls v Nicholls CA 20-Dec-1996
The formalities of committal proceedings are to be strictly observed, but a breach of the formalities may be overlooked if it does not affect the justice of the case.
Lord Woolf MR considered the discretion given to a court to commit for . .
Cited – Re Yaxley-Lennon (Aka Tommy Robinson) CACD 1-Aug-2018
Need for clarity in Contempt Allegation
The defendant appealed from his convictions for contempt of court, being said to have broadcast details of criminal prosecutions despite orders to the contrary. He argued that any failure of procedure was fatal to the prosecutions.
Held: As to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.624163

Fort Locks Self Storage Limited v Deakin: CA 2017

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 404

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re Yaxley-Lennon (Aka Tommy Robinson) CACD 1-Aug-2018
Need for clarity in Contempt Allegation
The defendant appealed from his convictions for contempt of court, being said to have broadcast details of criminal prosecutions despite orders to the contrary. He argued that any failure of procedure was fatal to the prosecutions.
Held: As to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.624164

Re West: CACD 17 Jul 2014

W, a barrister, appealed against a conviction for contempt of court. He had declined to comply with the directions asked of him by the judge at a pre-trial hearing, saying that the client’s instructions that he was not guilty were sufficient. He was found to have acted in contempt of court in refusing unreasonably to attend a hearing in a criminal case when he had been ordered so to do. His punishment was a fine of pounds 500.
Held: The Court overturned the finding of contempt because the alleged contemnor had not been served with a notice in advance of the hearing as required by the Rules.
Sir Brian Leveson P observed: ‘While Mr West was thus made aware in advance of the hearing that contempt of court would be considered, the notices provided clearly fell short of the procedural requirements set out in the Crim PR. In the normal course, compliance with the strict provisions of the Crim PR can be waived by the parties or the court; in cases of alleged contempt, however, we have no doubt that strict observance of the provisions is essential. As Mr Cox observed, the contempt jurisdiction is a powerful tool which can directly impact on the liberty of the subject. Compliance with the Crim PR allows the ‘charge’ to be fully formulated and beyond doubt; it provides a structure which forms the four corners of what is in issue and it avoids the very criticism that Mr Cox did advance in this case.
In the circumstances, given the significance of the jurisdiction of contempt of court, we have come to the conclusion that this failure of process invalidates the conclusion that the judge reached. We recognise that it is likely to have made little difference but we are not prepared to assert that; it is far more important to underline the vital importance, where issues of contempt arise in circumstances of this nature, of following the approach laid down by the Crim PR.’

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Patterson DBE J, Sir Richard Henriques

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Crim 1480, [2015] 1 WLR 109, [2014] WLR(D) 321, [2014] 2 Cr App R 28

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1960 13, Criminal Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Morris v Crown Office CA 1970
The applicants had been engaged in a calculated and coordinated campaign of disruption of the court.
Held: ‘The archaic description of these proceedings as ‘contempt of court’ is in my view unfortunate and misleading. It suggests that they are . .
Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Re Yaxley-Lennon (Aka Tommy Robinson) CACD 1-Aug-2018
Need for clarity in Contempt Allegation
The defendant appealed from his convictions for contempt of court, being said to have broadcast details of criminal prosecutions despite orders to the contrary. He argued that any failure of procedure was fatal to the prosecutions.
Held: As to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.534425

Regina v Sherwood, ex parte The Telegraph Group plc and Others: CACD 12 Jun 2001

When a court considered ordering a restriction on reporting of a case until after it was concluded, it had a three stage test to apply. First, would the reporting create a not insubstantial risk of prejudice. If there was no such risk, an order could not be made. Second, would an order reduce or remove the threat, and could the threat of harm be achieved by some lesser order. Only then could a court come to ask whether the degree of risk which might be run outweighed the competing duty to provide an open system of justice This was a case in which it had been necessary to order a split trial, and in addition to other factors the later trial may have been prejudiced by reporting of the first, and the order was properly made.
Longmore LJ said: ‘It is clear that the duty of the Court of Appeal when exercising this jurisdiction is not merely to review the decision of the trial judge who made the order under challenge, but rather to come to its own independent conclusions on the material placed before it’

Judges:

Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-2001, Gazette 12-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1075, [2001] 1 WLR 1983

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 4(2), Criminal Justice Act 1988 159, European Convention on Human Rights 6 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and Others, Regina v; Regina v The Crown Court at the Central Criminal Court ex parte A Times Newspapers Ltd etc CACD 13-Jan-2006
The defendant was to be charged with offences associated with terrorism. He had sought stay of the trial as an abuse of process saying that he had been tortured by English US and Pakistani authorities. The judge made an order as to what parts of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88666

Memory Corporation v Sidhu (No 2): CA 3 Dec 1999

Where a party applied to court for an ex parte order, counsel had direct duties to the court, and also the supporting legal team and clients had continuing and overlapping duties. There was little to be gained by trying to analyze these things too closely to apportion blame. Here counsel had applied to and misadvised the court on the practice, and documents produced were unreliable and possibly from an unlawful source. Where a defending party risked contempt proceedings, and was ordered to file affidavit evidence in respect of that matter, any claim for privilege against self-incrimination should be made before the affidavit is made. It was inappropriate to be asked first to file the affidavit, and then to ask the court to inspect and decide. The privilege was available to be exercised in contempt proceedings within the same proceedings as the main action.
Mummery LJ said that: ‘It cannot be emphasised too strongly that in an urgent without notice hearing for a freezing order as well as for a search order or any other form of interim injunction, there is a high duty to make full, fair and accurate disclosure of material information to the court and to draw the court’s attention to significant factual, legal and procedural aspects of the case. It is the particular duty of the advocate to see that the correct legal procedures and forms are used, that a written skeleton argument and properly drafted order are prepared by him personally and lodged with the court before the oral hearing, and that at the hearing the court’s attention is drawn by him to unusual features of the evidence adduced, to the applicable law and to the formalities and procedure to be observed.’
Robert Walker LJ discussed the apparent gathering of evidence by unlawful means and said that this has not in general led to its exclusion under the English law of evidence. It was far from obvious that concerns of this nature ‘should be added to the heavy responsibilities already undertaken by lawyers who are making a without notice application, except perhaps in circumstances where the evidence in question is of central importance to the application’. Even when the evidence is of central importance, for example evidence relating to the sale of contraband goods in a case of piracy of intellectual property rights, trap orders and other conduct involving impersonation or deception have been commonplace in the Chancery Division for a century or more, and do not seem to have attracted censure.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Robert Walker LJ

Citations:

Times 15-Feb-2000, Gazette 27-Jan-2000, Times 03-Dec-1999, [2000] EWCA Civ 9, [2000] 1 WLR 1443

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

On Appeal from – Memory Corporation Plc and Another v Sidhu ChD 21-May-1999
Where counsel proposing an asset freezing order fails to mention a case relevant to the issue, the order need not thereby be discharged. This is as against a failure to disclose a material fact, which would lead to a discharge of the order. . .
Approved – Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Al Alawi and Others ComC 3-Dec-1998
The claimants had brought proceedings against their former sales manager for accepting bribes and secret commission from outsiders. In support of their claim the claimants had obtained a search and seizure order and a worldwide freezing injunction, . .

Cited by:

See Also – Memory Corporation Plc, Datrontech Hong Kong Limited v Sukhbir Singh Sidhu, Sunsar Limited ChD 3-Nov-1999
. .
Cited – John Louis Carter Fourie v Allan Le Roux and others CA 7-Mar-2005
The defendant’s company in South Africa had become insolvent and the claimant had recovered judgment for arrears of rent. They obtained a freezing order against the defendant. The defendant appealed saying the court did not have jurisdiction, and . .
Cited – Fourie v Le Roux and others HL 24-Jan-2007
The appellant, liquidator of two South African companies, had made a successful without notice application for an asset freezing order. He believed that the defendants had stripped the companies of substantial assets. The order was set aside for . .
Cited – Franses v Al Assad and others ChD 26-Oct-2007
The claimant had obtained a freezing order over the proceeds of sale of a property held by solicitors. The claimant was liquidator of a company, and an allegation of wrongful trading had been made against the sole director and defendant. The . .
Cited – Tchenguiz and Others v Imerman CA 29-Jul-2010
Anticipating a refusal by H to disclose assets in ancillary relief proceedings, W’s brothers wrongfully accessed H’s computers to gather information. The court was asked whether the rule in Hildebrand remained correct. W appealed against an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Litigation Practice, Human Rights, Contempt of Court

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83628

Belgolaise Sa v Purchandani: QBD 24 Jun 1998

Committal proceedings for contempt should be only the last resort and for flagrant refusal to disclose in breach of court order. It must be exceptional to dispense with penal notice, and impossible to do so retrospectively.

Judges:

Colman J

Citations:

Times 30-Jul-1998, Gazette 30-Sep-1998

Cited by:

Cited – ABC and Others v CDE and Others QBD 3-Nov-2009
The first claimant sought committal of the first defendant for contempt of court, alleging breach of a freezing order, saying that the defendant had created a sham debt and repaid it.
Held: There had been no genuine loan agreement, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78323

Attorney General v Independent Television News and Others: QBD 12 May 1994

A complaint of contempt of court was defeated by a deal in the trial which had worked to reduce any risk of prejudice.

Citations:

Times 12-May-1994

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 1 2

Cited by:

Appeal from – Attorney General v Independent Television News and Others CA 1995
Leggatt LJ said that counsel for the Attorney General was correct when he submitted that: ‘It does not follow that because a risk had been created by the broadcast, further publication in newspapers would not create fresh and added risk of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.77952

Attorney-General v Birmingham Post and Mail Ltd: QBD 31 Aug 1998

The questions asked of a court when staying a criminal trial because of newspaper reporting, and when assessing a contempt of court, are different, and the stay of a trial need have no implication that a contempt has been committed. The strict liability rules did not help. Simon Brown LJ said: ‘It seems to me necessarily to follow . . that one and the same publication may well constitute a contempt and yet, even though not substantially mitigated in its effect by a temporary stay and/or change of venue, not so prejudice the trial as to undermine the safety of any subsequent conviction. To my mind that can only be because section 2(2) postulates a lesser degree of prejudice than is required to make good an appeal against conviction . . In short section 2(2) is designed to avoid (and where necessary punish) publications even if they merely risk prejudicing proceedings, whereas a stay will generally only be granted where it is recognised that any subsequent conviction would otherwise be imperilled, and a conviction will only be set aside . . if it is actually unsafe.’
As to the case of Unger, Simon Brown LJ said: ‘I still think that to create a seriously arguable ground of appeal is a sufficient basis for finding strict liability contempt. Clearly it is a relevant consideration too that when a judge at first instance is deciding whether or not to grant a temporary stay. But more particularly the trial judge will ask himself: ‘is there a real danger that the jury cannot reach a just verdict, or the defendant have a fair trial?’ The judge will have to form a view as to just how seriously prejudicial the publication is, to what extent it can be mitigated by special directions, how desirable it is to avert a possible risk of a successful appeal on that ground, and how inconvenient and costly in the particular circumstances a stay would be (depending in large part no doubt on how far into the trial the problem arises).’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Thomas J

Citations:

Times 31-Aug-1998, Gazette 30-Sep-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 769, [1999] 1 WLR 361, [1999] EMLR 39, [1998] 4 All ER 49

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 2(2)

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General v Michael Ronald Unger; Manchester Evening News Limited and Associated Newspapers Limited Admn 3-Jul-1997
Complaint was made that the defendant newspapers had caused a serious prejudice to a trial by articles published before the trial of the defendant in criminal proceedings. The defendant pleaded guilty to theft at the magistrates’ court after she had . .

Cited by:

Cited – Allen v The Grimsby Telegraph and Another QBD 2-Mar-2011
The claimant sought to prevent publication of his name in the context of the making of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO). He had been convicted of offences against sex workers. An order had been made preventing disclosure of his address, but . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.77978

Attorney-General v Sport Newspapers Ltd: QBD 24 May 1991

The newspaper was accused of disclosing details of the previous convictions of an absconded suspect in a murder investigation, despite a prior warning from the police that any such publication would be likely to prejudice future criminal proceedings. The Attorney General applied for the publisher to be fined and the editor to be committed to prison for contempt of court.
Held: The application was dismissed. The publishers and editor of the article could only be liable for contempt under the common law. A common law contempt was committed if there was publication of an article which caused a real risk of prejudice to the due administration of justice and it had been published with the specific intent to cause such a risk to the administration of justice. In this case, it had not been shown that the editor had had that specific intention when he caused the article to be published. As a consequence, neither the publishers nor the editor was guilty of common law contempt of court.

Citations:

[1991] 1 WLR 1194

Cited by:

Cited – Dallas v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Nov-2013
The applicant challenged her conviction for contempt of court in that whilst a juror, she researched the case before her on the internet, discovering that the defendant had faced an earlier allegation broadly similar. She now said that the . .
Cited – HM Solicitor General v Cox and Another QBD 27-May-2016
Applications for committal of the defendants for having taken photographs of court proceedings when their friend was being sentenced for murder and publishing them on Facebook. The SG urged that the offences had aggravating features taking the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.518895

Gulf Azov Shipping Company v Idisi: CA 2001

The defendant was found to have committed a serious breach of a freezing injunction.
Held: A committal order is appropriate where there is serious contumacious flouting of orders of the court. The sentence imposed was three months suspended on condition that the contempt was purged.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Idisi and others CA 25-Jan-2001
An order was made for the defendant to put up security for costs in order to pursue an appeal. The order had been for the security to be in cash. Application was now made for the security to be by way of a guarantee or bond.
Held: The proposed . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and Another v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others CA 14-Feb-2001
The court granted permission to appeal. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Company Ltd and others v Idisi and others CA 9-Mar-2001
Application for permission to appeal against assessment of damages. Refused. . .
See Also – Gulf Azov Shipping Co Ltd and others v Chief Humphrey Irikefe Idisi and others CA 15-Mar-2004
Appeal against award of costs against person who was not party to the original proceedings. . .
Cited – Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick and Others ChD 13-Nov-2006
The court considered the punishment on finding contempt proved for breach of a freezing order: ‘In contempt cases the object of the penalty is both to punish conduct in defiance of the court’s order as well as serving a coercive function by holding . .
Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.408559

Sony Computer Entertainment and Others v. Ball and Others: ChD 17 May 2004

Pumfrey J considered the test to be applied when a party applied for leave to commence proceedings for contempt of court against another party: ‘It seems to me, in the light of the judgment in Malgar v. Leach, that the discretion to permit applications of this nature to proceed must be exercised with very great caution. It can hardly be appropriate, it seems to me, to permit a general investigation of the facts surrounding a particular infringement in the context of contempt proceedings. That is why I have excluded from the permission which I have granted the greater number of the non-disclosures and misrepresentations alleged by the claimants.

It seems to me also that before this discretion is exercised, the claimant must satisfy the court that there is a strong case – and preferably an admitted case – that a particular misrepresentation is untrue.’ and
‘the court must be astute not to allow tenuous or argumentative applications to commit to go forward.’

Judges:

Pumfrey J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1192 (Ch)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Kabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited, Sony Computer Entertainment UK Limited v Ball, and others ChD 19-Jul-2004
The claimant sought summary judgment in a claim that the defendant had manufactured computer chips which would be used with their playstation computer games consoles to avoid their copy protection systems.
Held: The fact that the chips only . .
Applied – Malgar Ltd v R E Leach Engineering Ltd ChD 1-Nov-1999
The Civil Procedure Rules could not change the substantive law. It therefore remained necessary for it to be shown that in addition to knowing that what was said was false, the party had to have known that what was being said was likely to interfere . .

Cited by:

Cited – Kirk v Walton QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant sought leave to bring proceedings for contempt of court against the claimant saying that she had had no honest belief in the matters deposed in her statement of truth, in that she had substantially exaggerated her injuries.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Contempt of Court

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.272262

Coca-Cola Co and Another v Gilbey and Others: ChD 10 Oct 1995

A defendant in an infringement case was ordered to provide information on his associate co-infringers despite his claimed risk of violence. Such a threat was no defence to an action for contempt of court. Duress in civil cases goes as to mitigation only and does not operate as a defence.

Citations:

Times 28-Nov-1995, Independent 10-Oct-1995

Cited by:

Cited – The Coca-Cola Company and Another v Cengiz Aytacli and others ChD 30-Jan-2003
The claimant having succeeded in an action against the defendants, now sought an order for their committal for contempt, accusing them of having given false evidence, and of having failed to comply with court orders made. The defendant asserted a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.79253

Sevketoglu v Sevketoglu: CA 21 Aug 2003

The appellant had broken two court orders, and appealed a sentence of two months imprisonment. He had been held on remand for 28 days before the court hearing.
Held: The judge should have given allowance for the time spent in custody already. In contempt cases such time would not be deducted automatically, and therefore the sentence itself should be adjusted.

Judges:

Ward, Hale LJJ

Citations:

Times 27-Nov-2003

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Delaney v Delaney CA 2-Nov-1995
A County Court judge has no power to imprison a contemnor pending a sentence decision. Time spent in custody awaiting trial for contempt would not automatically be set off against the final sentence. Proceedings for contempt can be restored after . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.189945

Chuck v Cremer: 19 Nov 1846

A party in contempt may give a notice of motion, although he cannot move until the contempt of court is cleared. With referance to clearing contempt the answer must be taken be sufficient until exceptions are actually allowed.
Moving upon the answer is a waiver of the contempt

Citations:

[1846] EngR 1090 (A), (1846) 1 Coop T Cott 247

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer 24-Jul-1846
The plaintiff’s solicitor obtained an attachment against the defendant in default of a pleaded defence, disregarding a court order extending the period for filing the defence, which he considered to be a nullity. The order in question had been . .

Cited by:

See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1155) 1-Dec-1846
A party, who knows of a null or irregular order, should apply to discharge it. Whilst such an order is in existence it must not be disobeyed. . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer ([1846] EngR 1154) 1-Dec-1846
An order of the court of which the party affected by it has notice, though not formally served upon him is not to be disregarded or treated by him as a nullity, however certain it may be that the order is erroneous, and would, upon a proper . .
See Also – Chuck v Cremer 9-Feb-1848
Where an action is referred by an order at nisi prius this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the certificate of the referee or the judgment entered to pursuant thereto, on any ground on which it would not have such jurisdiction if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.302985

Adam Phones Ltd v Goldschmidt and Others: CA 17 Aug 1999

Especially given the new emphasis on proportionality, a party who brought contempt proceedings, in the case of an inadvertent breach of an injunction, with a view solely to creating costs for the other party, could expect to face those costs themselves. It was unwise to execute a complex search and seize order on a Saturday when the defendant would not have access to legal advice, and with no supervising solicitor. The mental element required of a contemnor is not that he either intends to breach or knows that he is breaching the court order or undertaking, but only that he intended the act or omission in question, and knew the facts which made it a breach of the order.
Jacob J, applying Bhimji, said: ‘Since that judgment the Civil Procedure Rules have come into force. Their emphasis on proportionality and on looking at the overall conduct of the parties emphasises the point that applications for committal should not be seen as a way of causing costs when the defendant has honestly tried to obey the court’s order.’

Judges:

Jacob J

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-1999, [1999] 4 All ER 486

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Bhimji v Chatwani 1991
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Sectorguard Plc v Dienne Plc ChD 3-Nov-2009
The claimant alleged misuse of confidential information in the form of its customer list, and its charges to them. The defendant company was run by former employees of the claimant. A later allegation was made of accessing the defendant’s private . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contempt of Court

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.77636

Regina v Yusuf: CACD 6 May 2003

It is essential that witnesses who had been called to attend court should do so. The public have a duty to co-operate with the courts. The appellant was called to be a witness in a murder trial. A witness summons had been served, but he did not attend.
Held: He had claimed to be afraid, but had retracted parts of his statement. The judge in this case had dealt with the appellant fairly, and there was no bias. The sentence of the maximim of three months’ imprisonment for contempt was appropriate given the deliberate act and the consequences.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Grigson Beatson JJ

Citations:

Times 12-May-2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Contempt of Court

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.182136