Three forms of contempt of court would be created under reforms proposed by the Law Commission
The commission would end the distinction between ‘criminal contempt’ and ‘civil contempt’. Instead, it would introduce ‘general contempt’, such as abusing court staff or witnesses, disrupting a hearing or making unauthorised recordings of proceedings. Either the court itself or the Attorney General could commence proceedings.
‘Contempt by breach of court order or undertaking’ would cover, for example, protesters entering land in breach of an injunction, a breach by someone subject to an anti-social behaviour injunction, or where a litigant in a high-value dispute takes assets out of the country in breach of a ‘freezing order’. Proceedings could be commenced with permission of the court by the landowner, local authority or litigant who obtained the freezing order.
The third contempt would be ‘contempt by publication when proceedings are active’, such as media reports or social media posts that reveal inadmissible evidence or risk influencing a jury. Proceedings could be commenced only by or with the permission of the Attorney General.
Currently, contempt is punishable by up to two years in prison and unlimited fines. The commission proposes retaining the maximum two-year sentence but expanding the range of sanctions available to include community sentences, restrictions on movement, and drug or alcohol treatment.
Professor Penney Lewis, commissioner for criminal law, said: ‘It is important that the laws governing contempt are both fair and clear to provide justice for all those involved in court proceedings. This includes not only the parties involved, but those observing or reporting on proceedings.’
The consultation, ‘Contempt of court’, published this week, closes on 8 November.
