Arlidge, Eady and Smith on Contempt

............................................................................................

Description
There have been many developments since the last edition was published in 2011, which we have tried to chart in the two intervening supplements. Notably there was a resurgence of interest in pursuing those who have in various ways by their actions undermined the integrity of trial by jury. In Att-Gen v Conde Nast [2016] EWHC 682 (Admin), the Lord Chief Justice commended the Law Officers for their determination to protect criminal trials from extraneous influence. A fine of £10,000 was imposed, but he commented that in future the level of fines might be increased (in line with those now being imposed in other areas of the criminal law, such as health and safety cases). He also warned that in future cases where legal advice led to the publication of material subsequently found to be in contempt the relevant lawyers should not assume that they will remain anonymous. Other strict liability cases have included Art-Gen v Times Newspapers Ltd [2012] EWHC 3195 (Admin) and Art-Gen v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2012] EWHC 2029 (Admin). At the other end of the spectrum, there has been a determination also to deal firmly with jurors who have ignored judicial directions and thereby created prejudice to the criminal justice system themselves. Indeed, two such cases have found their way to Strasbourg. In Seckerson v United Kingdom (2012) 54 E.H.R.R. SE19, a case of juror disclosure, the European Court rejected the notion that there had been disproportionate interference with the applicants' art. 10 rights, while leaving open the question of whether it might be disproportionate to go so far as to prevent the solicitation or disclosure of information about jury deliberations or decisions for the purpose of bona fide academic research. There had been a suggestion by the Law Commission that the law might be changed to enable enquiries to be made by "authorised academics" in that context, but on 30 July 2014 the government announced that there was no intention to take this forward for the time being.
............................................................................................

Table of Contents
Chapter 1 : History of the law of Contempt
Chapter 2 : Contempt of Court: The Constitutional Dimensions
Chapter 3 : The Distinctions between Criminal and Civil Contempt
Chapter 4 : The Statutory Regime for Strict Liability
Chapter 5 : Contempts by Publication at Common Law
Chapter 6 : Court Orders Affecting the Media
Chapter 7 : Court Restrictions under the 1981 Act
Chapter 8 : Court Reporting II: Other Statutory Restrictions
Chapter 9 : Protection of Sources
Chapter 10 : Contempt in the Face of the Court
Chapter 11 : Direct Interference with the Administration of Justice
Chapter 12 : Civil Contempt
Chapter 13 : Jurisdiction
Chapter 14 : Sanctions and Remedies
Chapter 15 : Practice, Procedure and Public Funding
Chapter 16 : Scotland
............................................................................................

Author Details
Arlidge
David Eady
A.T,H. Smith