Wood v The Registrar for the Supreme Court of Queensland

[2024] QCA 196

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Courts and Judges
2. › Contempt
3. › Contempt in face of court
4. › Allegations of corruption and incompetence directed at judge during proceedings
5. › Whether conduct constituted honest criticism directed at public purpose
6. › Whether defence of truth established
7. › Evidentiary onus on contemnor to raise defence of truth
1. Courts and Judges
2. › Contempt
3. › Punishment for contempt
4. › Sentence of imprisonment
5. › Whether structure of concurrent actual and wholly suspended sentences rendered sentence manifestly excessive
6. › Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), ss 144, 145, 147, 148, 155
7. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), rr 930, 931
1. Courts and Judges
2. › Contempt
3. › Discharge from imprisonment for contempt
4. › Power to order early discharge
5. › Considerations of clemency
6. › Whether change of circumstances warranted discharge
7. › Whether absence of apology or contrition precluded discharge
8. › Whether release into community pending appeal constituted relevant change of circumstances
1. Evidence
2. › Admissibility
3. › Audio recordings and transcripts of court proceedings
4. › Whether hearsay rule engaged
5. › Evidence tendered to prove fact of statement not truth of contents
6. › Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), s 92

Quick Take

Under the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld), s 155, an offender does not 'serve' a suspended sentence until ordered to do so under s 147; accordingly, it is erroneous to structure a sentence so that actual imprisonment is served concurrently with a wholly suspended sentence, as this may result in the actual term being fully served before the suspended sentence can take effect. In contempt proceedings, the court may give weight to an informal application for discharge when re-exercising its sentencing discretion, where changed circumstances (such as release into the community pending appeal through no fault of the contemnor) have occurred, even in the absence of an apology, provided there are other mitigating factors such as the contemnor's concession of possible error and the objective baselessness of the contemptuous statements.