Contempt of court

Contempt of court, often referred to simply as "contempt", is the offense of being disobedient
to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes
or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court.[1][2] A similar attitude toward a
legislative body is termed contempt of Parliament or contempt of Congress. The verb for "to
commit contempt" is contemn (as in "to contemn a court order") and a person guilty of this is
a contemnor.[3]

There are broadly two categories of contempt: being disrespectful to legal authorities in the
courtroom, or willfully failing to obey a court order.[4] Contempt proceedings are especially
used to enforce equitable remedies, such as injunctions.[5] In some jurisdictions, the refusal
to respond to subpoena, to testify, to fulfill the obligations of a juror, or to provide certain
information can constitute contempt of the court.

When a court decides that an action constitutes contempt of court, it can issue an order in
the context of a court trial or hearing that declares a person or organization to have
disobeyed or been disrespectful of the court's authority, called "found" or "held" in contempt.
That is the judge's strongest power to impose sanctions for acts that disrupt the court's
normal process.

A finding of being in contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a
court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior,
or publication of material or non-disclosure of material, which in doing so is deemed likely to
jeopardize a fair trial. A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine, jail or social service for
someone found guilty of contempt of court, which makes contempt of court a process crime.
Judges in common law systems usually have more extensive power to declare someone in
contempt than judges in civil law systems.
In use today

Contempt of court is essentially seen as a form of disturbance that may impede the
functioning of the court. The judge may impose fines and/or jail time upon any person
committing contempt of court. The person is usually let out upon his or her agreement to
fulfill the wishes of the court.[6] Civil contempt can involve acts of omission. The judge will
make use of warnings in most situations that may lead to a person being charged with
contempt if the warnings are ignored. It is relatively rare that a person is charged for
contempt without first receiving at least one warning from the judge.[7] Constructive
contempt, also called consequential contempt, is when a person fails to fulfill the will of the
court as it applies to outside obligations of the person. In most cases, constructive contempt
is considered to be in the realm of civil contempt due to its passive nature.

Indirect contempt is something that is associated with civil and constructive contempt and
involves a failure to follow court orders. Criminal contempt includes anything that could be
considered a disturbance, such as repeatedly talking out of turn, bringing forth previously
banned evidence, or harassment of any other party in the courtroom.[6] Direct contempt is an
unacceptable act in the presence of the judge (in facie curiae), and generally begins with a
warning, and may be accompanied by an immediate imposition of punishment Liu, Caitlin
(April 20, 2005), "Sleepy Juror Gets Rude Awakening" (http://articles.latimes.com/2005/apr/2
0/local/me-yawn20) , Los Angeles Times</ref>

Australia

In Australia, a judge may impose a fine or jail for contempt of court,[8][9]

Belgium

A Belgian correctional or civil judge may immediately try the person for insulting the court.[10]

Canada

Common law offence

In Canada, contempt of court is an exception to the general principle that all criminal
offences are set out in the federal Criminal Code. Contempt of court and contempt of
Parliament are the only remaining common law offences in Canada.[11]

Contempt of court includes the following behaviors:

 Failing to maintain a respectful attitude, failing to remain silent or failing to refrain from
showing approval or disapproval of the proceeding

Refusing or neglecting to obey a subpoena

Willfully disobeying a process or order of the court

Interfering with the orderly administration of justice or impairing the authority or dignity of
the court

An officer of the court failing to perform his or her duties

A sheriff or bailiff not executing a writ of the court forthwith or not making a return thereof
Canadian Federal courts

This section applies only to Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court.

Under Federal Court Rules, Rules 466, and Rule 467 a person who is accused of Contempt
needs to be first served with a contempt order and then appear in court to answer the
charges. Convictions can only be made when proof beyond a reasonable doubt is
achieved.[12]

If it is a matter of urgency or the contempt was done in front of a judge, that person can be
punished immediately. Punishment can range from the person being imprisoned for a period
of less than five years or until the person complies with the order or fine.

Tax Court of Canada

Under Tax Court of Canada Rules of Tax Court of Canada Act, a person who is found to be in
contempt may be imprisoned for a period of less than two years or fined. Similar procedures
for serving an order first is also used at the Tax Court.

Provincial courts

Different procedures exist for different provincial courts. For example, in British Columbia, a
justice of the peace can only issue a summons to an offender for contempt, which will be
dealt with by a judge, even if the offence was done in the face of the justice.[13]

Hong Kong

Judges from the Court of Final Appeal, High Court, District Court along with members from
the various tribunals and Coroner's Court all have the power to impose immediate
punishments for contempt in the face of the court, derived from legislation or through
common law:
 Insult a judge or justice, witness or officers of the court

Interrupts the proceedings of the court

Interfere with the course of justice

Misbehaves in court (e.g., use of mobile phone or recording devices without permission)

Juror who leaves without permission of the court during proceedings

Disobeying a judgment or court order

Breach of undertaking

Breach of a duty imposed upon a solicitor by rules of court

The use of insulting or threatening language in the magistrates' courts or against a

magistrate is in breach of section 99 of the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap 227) which states
the magistrate can 'summarily sentence the offender to a fine at level 3 and to imprisonment
for 6 months.'

In addition, certain appeal boards are given the statutory authority for contempt by them (e.g.,
Residential Care Home, Hotel and Guesthouse Accommodation, Air Pollution Control, etc.).
For contempt in front of these boards, the chairperson will certify the act of contempt to the
Court of First Instance who will then proceed with a hearing and determine the punishment.

England and Wales

In England and Wales (a common law jurisdiction), the law on contempt is partly set out in
case law (common law), and partly codified by the Contempt of Court Act 1981. Contempt
may be classified as criminal or civil. The maximum penalty for criminal contempt under the
1981 Act is committal to prison for two years.

Disorderly, contemptuous or insolent behavior toward the judge or magistrates while holding
the court, tending to interrupt the due course of a trial or other judicial proceeding, may be
prosecuted as "direct" contempt. The term "direct" means that the court itself cites the
person in contempt by describing the behavior observed on the record. Direct contempt is
distinctly different from indirect contempt, wherein another individual may file papers alleging
contempt against a person who has willfully violated a lawful court order.

There are limits to the powers of contempt created by rulings of European Court of Human
Rights. Reporting on contempt of court, the Law Commission commented that "punishment
of an advocate for what he or she says in court, whether a criticism of the judge or a
prosecutor, amounts to an interference with his or her rights under article 10 of the ECHR"
and that such limits must be "prescribed by law" and be "necessary in a democratic
society",[14] citing Nikula v Finland.[15]

Criminal contempt

The Crown Court is a superior court according to the Senior Courts Act 1981, and Crown
Courts have the power to punish contempt. The Divisional Court as part of the High Court
has ruled that this power can apply in these three circumstances:

1. Contempt "in the face of the court" (not to be taken literally; the judge does not need to
see it, provided it took place within the court precincts or relates to a case currently
before that court);

2. Disobedience of a court order; and

3. Breaches of undertakings to the court.

Where it is necessary to act quickly, a judge may act to impose committal (to prison) for
contempt.

Where it is not necessary to be so urgent, or where indirect contempt has taken place the
Attorney General can intervene and the Crown Prosecution Service will institute criminal
proceedings on his behalf before a Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division of the High
Court of Justice of England and Wales.

Magistrates' courts also have powers under the 1981 Act to order to detain any person who
"insults the court" or otherwise disrupts its proceedings until the end of the sitting. Upon
contempt being admitted or proved the (invariably) District Judge (sitting as a magistrate)
may order committal to prison for a maximum of one month, impose a fine of up to £2,500, or
both.

It will be contempt to bring an audio recording device or picture-taking device of any sort into
an English court without the consent of the court.[16]

It will not be contempt according to section 10 of the Act for a journalist to refuse to disclose
his sources, unless the court has considered the evidence available and determined that the
information is "necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention
of disorder or crime".

Strict liability contempt

Under the Contempt of Court Act it is criminal contempt to publish anything which creates a
real risk that the course of justice in proceedings may be seriously impaired. It only applies
where proceedings are active, and the Attorney General has issued guidance as to when he
believes this to be the case, and there is also statutory guidance. The clause prevents the
newspapers and media from publishing material that is too extreme or sensationalist about a
criminal case until the trial or linked trials are over and the juries have given their verdicts.

Section 2 of the Act defines and limits the previous common law definition of contempt
(which was previously based upon a presumption that any conduct could be treated as
contempt, regardless of intent), to only instances where there can be proved an intent to
cause a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice (i.e./e.g., the
conduct of a trial).

Civil contempt

In civil proceedings there are two main ways in which contempt is committed:

1. Failure to attend at court despite a summons requiring attendance. In respect of the

High Court, historically a writ of latitat would have been issued, but now a bench warrant
is issued, authorizing the tipstaff to arrange for the arrest of the individual, and
imprisonment until the date and time the court appoints to next sit. In practice a
groveling letter of apology to the court is sufficient to ward off this possibility, and in any
event the warrant is generally "backed for bail"—i.e., bail will be granted once the arrest
has been made and a location where the person can be found in future established.

2. Failure to comply with a court order. A copy of the order, with a "penal notice"—i.e.,
notice informing the recipient that if they do not comply they are subject to
imprisonment—is served on the person concerned. If, after that, they breach the order,
proceedings can be started and in theory the person involved can be sent to prison. In
practice this rarely happens as the cost on the claimant of bringing these proceedings is
significant and in practice imprisonment is rarely ordered as an apology or fine are
usually considered appropriate.

India

In India, contempt of court is of two types:

1. Civil contempt: Under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, civil
contempt has been defined as wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction,
order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.

2. Criminal contempt: Under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, criminal
contempt has been defined as the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or
by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any
other act whatsoever which:
 i. Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of,
any court, or

ii. Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial
proceeding, or

iii. Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the

administration of justice in any other manner.

Singapore

United States

In United States jurisprudence, acts of contempt are generally divided into direct or indirect
and civil or criminal. Direct contempt occurs in the presence of a judge; civil contempt is
"coercive and remedial" as opposed to punitive. In the United States, relevant statutes include
18 U.S.C. §§ 401 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/401) –403 (https://www.law.
cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/403) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42.[17]

1. Direct contempt is that which occurs in the presence of the presiding judge (in facie
curiae) and may be dealt with summarily: the judge notifies the offending party that he
or she has acted in a manner which disrupts the tribunal and prejudices the
administration of justice. After giving the person the opportunity to respond, the judge
may impose the sanction immediately.

2. Indirect contempt occurs outside the immediate presence of the court and consists of
disobedience of a court's prior order. Generally a party will be accused of indirect
contempt by the party for whose benefit the order was entered. A person cited for
indirect contempt is entitled to notice of the charge and an opportunity for hearing of
the evidence of contempt and, since there is no written procedure, may or may not be
allowed to present evidence in rebuttal.

Contempt of court in a civil suit is generally not considered to be a criminal offense, with the
party benefiting from the order also holding responsibility for the enforcement of the order.
However, some cases of civil contempt have been perceived as intending to harm the
reputation of the plaintiff, or to a lesser degree, the judge or the court.

Sanctions for contempt may be criminal or civil. If a person is to be punished criminally, then
the contempt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but once the charge is proven, then
punishment (such as a fine or, in more serious cases, imprisonment) is imposed
unconditionally. The civil sanction for contempt (which is typically incarceration in the
custody of the sheriff or similar court officer) is limited in its imposition for so long as the
disobedience to the court's order continues: once the party complies with the court's order,
the sanction is lifted. The imposed party is said to "hold the keys" to his or her own cell, thus
conventional due process is not required. In federal and most state courts, the burden of
proof for civil contempt is clear and convincing evidence, a lower standard than in criminal
cases.[18]

In civil contempt cases there is no principle of proportionality. In Chadwick v. Janecka (3d Cir.
2002), a U.S. court of appeals held that H. Beatty Chadwick could be held indefinitely under
federal law, for his failure to produce US$2.5 million as state court ordered in a civil trial.
Chadwick had been imprisoned for nine years at that time and continued to be held in prison
until 2009, when a state court set him free after 14 years, making his imprisonment the
longest on a contempt charge to date.

Civil contempt is only appropriate when the imposed party has the power to comply with the
underlying order.[19] Controversial contempt rulings have periodically arisen from cases
involving asset protection trusts, where the court has ordered a settlor of an asset protection
trust to repatriate assets so that the assets may be made available to a creditor.[20] A court
cannot maintain an order of contempt where the imposed party does not have the ability to
comply with the underlying order. This claim when made by the imposed party is known as
the "impossibility defense".[21]

Contempt of court is considered a prerogative of the court, and "the requirement of a jury
does not apply to 'contempts committed in disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order,
rule, decree, or command entered in any suit or action brought or prosecuted in the name of,
or on behalf of, the United States.'" This stance is not universally agreed with by other areas
of the legal world, and there have been many calls to have contempt cases to be tried by jury,
rather than by judge, as a potential conflict of interest rising from a judge both accusing and
sentencing the defendant. At least one Supreme Court Justice has made calls for jury trials
to replace judge trials on contempt cases.[22]

The United States Marshals Service is the agency component that first holds all federal
prisoners. It uses the Prisoner Population Management System /Prisoner Tracking System.
The only types of records that are disclosed as being in the system are those of "federal
prisoners who are in custody pending criminal proceedings." The records of "alleged civil
contempors" are not listed in the Federal Register as being in the system leading to a
potential claim for damages under The Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(e)(4)(I) (https://www.law.
cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/552a(e)(4)(I)) .[23]

News media in the United States

In the United States, because of the broad protections granted by the First Amendment, with
extremely limited exceptions, unless the media outlet is a party to the case, a media outlet
cannot be found in contempt of court for reporting about a case because a court cannot
order the media in general not to report on a case or forbid it from reporting facts discovered
publicly.[24] Newspapers cannot be closed because of their content.[25]

Criticism

There have been criticisms over the practice of trying contempt from the bench. In particular,
Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black wrote in a dissent, "It is high time, in my judgment, to wipe
out root and branch the judge-invented and judge-maintained notion that judges can try
criminal contempt cases without a jury."[22]

See also

Contempt of cop

Contumacy

Judicial discretion

Lèse-majesté

Perjury

Perverting the course of justice

Obstruction of justice

Offence of scandalizing the court in Singapore

References

1. "contempt: definition of contempt in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)" (http://www.oxfordd

ictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/contempt?q=contempt) . Oxforddictionaries.com.
2014-08-05. Retrieved 2014-08-13.

2. Lehman, Jeffrey; Phelps, Shirelle (2005). West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 3 (2 ed.).
Detroit: Thomson/Gale. p. 155. ISBN 9780787663704.

3. "Civil Contempt of Court" (https://www.findlaw.com/litigation/going-to-court/civil-contempt-of-co

urt.html) . Findlaw. Retrieved 2022-05-01.

4. "Legal Dictionary | Law.com" (http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=325) .

Dictionary.law.com. 2010-12-09. Retrieved 2014-08-13.

5. Bray, Samuel (2014). "The Myth of the Mild Declaratory Judgment". Duke Law Journal. 63: 1091.
SSRN 2330050 (https://ssrn.com/abstract=2330050) .
 6. Hill, G. (2008). Contempt of Court. Retrieved April 12, 2008 from, Law.dictionary.com Web site: [1] (ht
tp://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=contempt&type=1&submit1.x=0&submit1.y=0&submit1
=Look+up)

7. Hill, G. (2008). Contempt of Court. Retrieved April 12, 2008 from , Law.dictionary.com Web site:
[2] (h
ttp://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=contempt&type=1&submit1.x=0&submit1.y=0&submit1
=Look+up)

8. "Contempt & court reporting in Australia" (http://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_

australia_03.html) . Thenewsmanual.net. Retrieved 2014-08-13.

9. Robinson, Natasha (9 December 2016). "Islamic State recruiter's wife Moutia Elzahed may be first
charged under disrespectful behaviour laws" (https://web.archive.org/web/20161209215419/http://
www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-09/disrespectful-court-behaviour-laws-tested-in-new-south-wales/8
107300) . ABC News. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Archived from the original (http://www.
abc.net.au/news/2016-12-09/disrespectful-court-behaviour-laws-tested-in-new-south-wales/8107
300) on 9 December 2016.

10. Article 181 Belgian Judicial Code.

11. A Compendium of Law and Judges (http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/legal_compendium/Chapter22.a

sp)

12. "Federal Court Rules Chapter 12" (https://archive.today/20030503180331/http://reports.fja.gc.ca/re

gles/partie12.html) . Archived from the original (http://reports.fja.gc.ca/regles/partie12.html) on
3 May 2003.

13. "Provincial Court Act Jurisdiction of justice" (https://web.archive.org/web/20081219190114/http://

www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/P/96379_01.htm#section31) . Archived from the original (http://w
ww.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/P/96379_01.htm#section31) on 2008-12-19. Retrieved 2009-05-20.

14. "CONTEMPT OF COURT A Consultation Paper" (http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/app/uploads/2015/03/c

p209_contempt_of_court.pdf) (PDF).

15. "Nikula v Finland" (https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2002/324.html) .

16. "Contempt of Court, Reporting Restrictions and Restrictions on Public Access to Hearings" (https://
www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/contempt-court-reporting-restrictions-and-restrictions-public-acces
s-hearings) . www.cps.gov.uk. 2018-05-11. Retrieved 2019-07-08.

17. [Doyle C. (2010). Obstruction of Justice: An Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes That Prohibit
Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities (https://opencrs.com/document/RL343
03/2010-11-05/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130615082208/https://opencrs.com/d
ocument/RL34303/2010-11-05/) 2013-06-15 at the Wayback Machine. Congressional Research
Service.

18. Fischer, James M. (2010-12-07). Understanding Remedies (https://books.google.com/books?id=TO

3y5uG8-6wC&q=civil%20contempt%20clear%20and%20convincing&pg=PT671) . LexisNexis.
ISBN 9781422486559.
19. "See In re Marciano" (https://web.archive.org/web/20130406130931/http://www.protectyou.com/bl
og/case-law/in-re-marciano/) . Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.: Westlaw. Archived from the original (h
ttp://www.protectyou.com/blog/case-law/in-re-marciano/) on 2013-04-06. Retrieved 2013-02-05.

20. Howard Rosen; Patricia Donlevy-Rosen. "The Importance of Proper APT Design & Counsel" (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20140203000323/http://protectyou.com/1998/10/the-importance-of-a-property
-asset-protection-design/) . The Asset Protection News. Archived from the original (http://protecty
ou.com/1998/10/the-importance-of-a-property-asset-protection-design/) on 2014-02-03. Retrieved
2014-01-29.

21. Phillips, Sam. "In re Marciano - an analysis of the impossibility defense in contempt" (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20130406130957/http://www.protectyou.com/blog/in-re-marciano-an-analysis-of-the-
impossibility-defense-in-contempt/) . Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A. Archived from the original (htt
p://www.protectyou.com/blog/in-re-marciano-an-analysis-of-the-impossibility-defense-in-contemp
t/) on 2013-04-06. Retrieved 2013-02-05.

22. United States v. Barnett, 376 U.S. 681 (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/681/)

(1964).

23. Federal Register on November 8, 1999 in Vol. 64, No. 215 page 60836 a “Revised Notice regarding its
Prisoner Tracking System”

24. Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539 (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/427/5

39/) (1976).

25. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/283/697/) (1931).

Further reading

Scarce, Rik. "Contempt of Court: A Scholar's Battle for Free Speech from behind Bars"
(2005) (ISBN 0759106436).

External links

Wikiquote has quotations related to Contempt of court.

Look up contempt of court in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

"Contempt of Court"  (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannic

a/Contempt_of_Court) . Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). 1911.
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Contempt_of_court&oldid=1094443548"

Last edited 15 days ago by 108.209.13.35