header-logo header-logo

Criminal contempt: the pendulum swings

02 June 2023 / Wilson Leung
Issue: 8027 / Categories: Features , Contempt , Criminal , Procedure & practice , International
printer mail-detail
124245
Wilson Leung examines a recent judgment providing much-needed clarity on the process of bringing committal proceedings in Hong Kong
  • The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal has held that a party does not need to inform or seek the consent of the Secretary for Justice (the equivalent of the attorney general (AG) in other jurisdictions) before commencing committal proceedings in relation to criminal contempt.
  • This decision provides welcome clarification for practitioners in civil litigation.
  • It now appears clear that the litigant may bring such proceedings without having to seek the AG’s consent.

Contempt of court has traditionally been classified as criminal or civil contempt. Civil contempt is concerned with breaches of court orders or undertakings, whereas criminal contempt relates to other acts which seriously impede the administration of justice (A-G v Times Newspapers Ltd [1974] AC 273).

Despite occasional criticism of the distinction (eg Jennison v Baker [1972] 2 QB 52, p61H), it continues to persist for the time being, at least in England (R

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll