Grocon & Ors v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union & Ors (No 2)

[2014] VSC 134

Supreme Court of Victoria

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Contempt of Court
2. › Civil contempt
3. › Penalty
4. › Principles governing imposition of penalty
5. › Standard of proof
6. › Whether criminal standard applies
7. › Whether Barbaro v The Queen applies to civil contempt penalty proceedings
1. Contempt of Court
2. › Civil contempt
3. › Power to fine
4. › Whether power to fine limited to contempts with criminal character
5. › Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic), r 75.11
1. Contempt of Court
2. › Civil contempt
3. › Penalty submissions
4. › Whether parties may make submissions on appropriate penalty range
5. › Barbaro v The Queen [2014] HCA 2
1. Industrial Law
2. › Contempt of court in industrial disputes
3. › Breach of court orders by trade union
4. › Relevant factors in penalty
5. › Deterrence
6. › Contumacy

Quick Take

Parties in civil contempt proceedings may continue to make submissions on the appropriate penalty range notwithstanding the High Court's decision in Barbaro v The Queen, which is confined to criminal sentencing. The court's power to impose a fine for civil contempt under r 75.11 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic) is not limited to contempts with a criminal character. Contumacy (wilful defiance of court orders) is a significant aggravating factor in assessing penalty for civil contempt.