The tendency of a publication to undermine public confidence in the administration of justice for the purposes of contempt by scandalising the court must be assessed at the time of publication and is not negated by the subsequent absence of appreciable harm. The implied constitutional freedom of political communication does not override the law of contempt by scandalising the court where the contempt principles satisfy the Lange two-limbed test for validity, and the constitutional immunity is defeated where the communication is actuated by ill will or malice. Out-of-court statements (including tape-recorded confessions) are inadmissible hearsay and cannot constitute credible evidence of the truth of allegations of judicial corruption in contempt proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 9 later cases that cite this judgment.