Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v John Marsden

(2001) 122 A Crim R 166; [2001] NSWCA 32

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Contempt of Court
2. › Criminal contempt
3. › Knowledge of orders as essential element
4. › Level of knowledge required
5. › Knowledge of substance of orders sufficient
6. › Whether evidence established requisite knowledge beyond reasonable doubt
1. Criminal Law
2. › No case submission
3. › Standard to be applied
4. › Whether judge sitting alone may evaluate evidence qualitatively
5. › Whether same test applies as in jury trials
6. › Question of law distinguished from question of fact
1. Contempt of Court
2. › Criminal contempt
3. › Standard of proof
4. › Beyond reasonable doubt
1. Contempt of Court
2. › Criminal contempt
3. › Frustrating, thwarting or subverting court orders
4. › Construction of non-publication order
5. › Prospective effect of order
6. › Whether conduct prior to resumption of proceedings capable of frustrating order

Quick Take

In criminal contempt proceedings (and criminal proceedings generally) before a judge or magistrate sitting alone in NSW, the test on a no case submission is the same as in jury trials: the judge must not evaluate or weigh the evidence but must determine only whether there is evidence on which the defendant could lawfully be convicted. Knowledge of the substance of the specific court order is an essential element of a contempt charge for breach of that order, and the criminal standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) applies to that element. The Protean (Holdings) and Rasomen line of authority permitting qualitative evaluation of evidence on no case submissions was not followed.