header-logo header-logo

Choose your weapon wisely

25 October 2013 / Nicholas Stewart KC , Max Cole
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
001_nlj_7581_ofc

Nicholas Stewart QC & Max Cole on the risks of contempt of court applications

Contempt of court comes in many forms, some more lively than others. A defendant who ate an incriminating telex during the execution of an Anton Piller search order was obviously guilty. Rather longer ago, it was unsurprisingly a contempt to draw a sword to strike a judge. On the other hand, applying some version of the sticks and stones principle, an Australian court held in 2000 that it was no contempt, by a barrister as it happened, to call a judge by the w-word. Not wise, though.

Civil contempt by an individual is punishable by prison and/or a fine. In the case of a company, its officers are liable to those same punishments and the company can be fined. The contemnor’s assets may also be placed in the hands of sequestrators—as with the National Union of Mineworkers in the bitter mid-1980s litigation. While it is called civil contempt, the applicant must meet the criminal standard of proof.

Motives

From

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll