Contempt of Court
Date Produced: 1 July 2011
Title: Administration of Justice
Offence: Contempt of Court
Legislation: Common Law: subject to statutory limitation in Contempt of Court Act 1981 section 14
Commencement Date:
Mode of Trial: not applicable
Statutory Limitations and Maximum Penalty: 2 Years if committed to prison by Crown Court (1 month if committed by magistrates)
Aggravating & Mitigating Factors
See R v Montgomery (1995) 16 Cr. App. R. (S) 274
Relevant Sentencing Guidelines
R v Montgomery (1995) 16 Cr. App. R. (S) 274 is the only guideline case
Contempt case involving uncooperative witness. General principles:
- An immediate custodial sentence is the only appropriate sentence to impose upon a person who interferes with the administration of justice, unless the circumstances are wholly exceptional
- Whilst review of the authorities suggests that interference with, or threats made to, jurors are usually visited with higher sentences than the case of a witness who refuses to give evidence, there is no rule or established practice to that effect, the circumstances of each case are all important.
- Although the maximum sentence for failing to comply with a witness order is 3 months, this should not inhibit a substantially longer sentence for a blatant contempt in the face of the court by a witness who has refused to testify.
- The principle matters affecting sentence are the gravity of the offence being tried; the effect upon the trial; the contemnor's reasons for failing to give evidence; whether the contempt is aggravated by impertinence defiance rather than a simple and stubborn refusal to answer; the scale of sentences in similar cases; the antecedents; personal circumstances and characteristics of the contemnor; whether a special deterrent is needed.
Offender had made a statement relating to a confession made by the defendant charged with conspiracy to damage. Sentence reduced to 3 months. The Court of Appeal repeated that the question of sentence upon the contemnor is best left until the end of trial, or at least the end of the Crown's case.
Relevant Sentencing Case Law
Recent Decsions reported in Current Sentencing Practice reported at B.8-3.3 divided into; attempting to influence witnesses; newspaper publishing material prejudicial to trial of case before Crown Court; attempting to influence juror; witness refusing to give evidence; failure to attend trial as witness; failure to surrender to bail; abusing judge or officer of court; disobeying restraint order:
Attempting to influence witnesses
The cases reported in Current Sentencing Practice at B8-3.3A are all at least a decade old, doubtless because these offences tend now to be dealt with under the Criminal Justice Act 1994 section 51. In most of these cases, sentences upheld did not exceed 6-9 months, although in R v James two years was upheld and in R v Stredder 12 months was upheld.
Attempting to influence jurors
Cases reported in Current Sentencing Practice at B8-3.3C show immediate custodial sentences of up to 12 months being upheld.
R v Bryan [2005] Cr. App. R. (S) 2 106
The appellant having been granted bail by the Crown Court at the end of the first day of his trial, he entered a shop and saw one of the jurors. The Court accepted that it was a chance meeting. He said to the juror, "I'm definitely innocent, mate". The juror reported the approach. Sentence of 12 months reduced to nine months' imprisonment on appeal.
Witness refusing to give evidence
See R v Montgomery [1995] 16 Cr. App. R. (S) 274 (above).
Cases reported in Current Sentencing Practice at B8-3.3D show sentences of up to six months being upheld
R v Rainford [2007] 2 Cr. App. R. (S) 18 - a crucial witness at a death by dangerous driving trial refused to give evidence and the case was abandoned. The judge accepted that he had been subjected to threats concerning his girlfriend and mother, and that they all lived in a close-knit community. Sentence of six months detention in a YOI consecutive to the sentence he was serving upheld.
Failure to attend trial as a witness
Two old cases (the last in 1995) reported in Current Sentencing Practice at B8-3.3E show custodial sentences of 14 days being regarded as appropriate
Failure to surrender to bail
See Sentencing Guidelines Council Definitive Guideline on Failure to Surrender (FTS) to bail (10 December 2007)
Cases reported in current Sentencing Parctice B8-3.3f show sentences of up to six months being approved provided court followed the correct procedure.
R v Deeley [1998] 1 Cr. App. R. (S) 113 - appeallant convicted of a bail offences in the Crown Court. Having failed to surrender for a plea and directions hearing, he was arrested three weeks later on a bench warrant. Sentence reduced to three months' imprisonment.
R v Cockburn-Smith [2009] 1 Cr. App. R. (S) 20 - appellant failed to appear for trial of a preliminary issue. He was eventually arrested after being abroad. The prosecution did not proceed on the substantive charge. He was sentenced to 12 weeks' imprisonment for FTS to bail. Upheld on appeal. Seriousness of FTS is not automatically reduced by subsequent acquittal of the original offence.
Abusing Judge or officer of court
R v Osbourne [1993] 14 Cr. App. R. (S) 265 - sentence having been passed in the Crown Court on the appellant's girlfriend, he walked after the female solicitor for the prosecution and made remarks such as "you will not be smiling any more". Sentence reduced to two months, which effectively secured immediate release.
R v Phelps [2010] 2 Cr. App. R. (S) 1 - during the course of mitigation the appellant became incensed and struck out at a (female) dock officer. During the ensuing struggle he punched two other (female) officers. Sentenced forthwith to 2 years for contempt consecutive to sentence for other offences. Court of Appeal thought it difficult to imagine a worst case of bad behaviour in court. Nonetheless, it reduced the sentence to 12 months. The judge would have been better not to have sentenced immediately - the appellant should have been given time to calm down and apologise if he chose too.
Disobeying restraint order
R v Adewunmi [2008] 2 Cr. App. R. (S) 52 - the appellant admitted cntempt of court by breaking the terms of a restraint order, restraining him from dealing or diminishing the value of his assets to to the value of £1 million and ordering him to arrange for the repatriation of funds in bank accounts abroad. He failed to repatriate the funds and transferred assets from the United States to Cyprus. The Court observed that ordinarily there are two elements underpinning a committal for contempt in such circumstances: first, a punitive element to punish the deliberate breaches of the court order; and secondly, a coercive element in order to require the contemnor to do what he is obliged to do under the existing order. The Court expressed surprise that some sentences passed for breaches of restraining orders in broadly comparable circumstances, culled from unreported Crown Court decisions, had been as low as only a few weeks. Sentence of 18 months' imprisonment consecutive to sentence for the main offence reduced to 12 months.
R v Reddy [2010] 2 Cr. App. R. (S) 107 - a sentence of 20 months' imprisonment for contempt after a guilty plea was excessive for an offender who had sold his home in breach of a restraint order and made off with the proceeds. A sentence of 15 months' was appropriate
