ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NEW SOUTH WALES v TCN CHANNEL NINE PTY LIMITED [1990] NSWCA 8

ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NEW SOUTH WALES v TCN CHANNEL NINE PTY LIMITED

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

GLEESON CJ, KIRBY P and PRIESTLEY JA 20 September 1990, 11 October 1990

[1990] NSWCA 8

CONTEMPT — penalty — relevant facts set out in judgment published on 31 August 1990 — objective features serious — subjective matters taken in mitigation including no prior convictions, full apology — HELD — an appropriate penalty was a fine of $75,000.

Gleeson CJ, Kirby P and Priestley JA. On 31 August 1990 we indicated, for reasons published on that day, that we proposed to make declarations to the effect that the Opponent was guilty of contempt of court by reason of its conduct in respect of two television broadcasts both of which occurred on 30 July 1989. Subsequently we heard evidence and argument on the matter of penalty.

It was agreed between the parties that, notwithstanding that there were two acts of contempt, if we were of the view that the imposition of a pecuniary penalty were otherwise appropriate in all the circumstances it would be appropriate to impose one fine rather than two. We intend to deal with the matter on that basis.

The relevant facts are set out in our reasons for judgment published on 31 August 1990 and we shall not repeat them. The additional evidence tendered following the publication of those reasons consisted of an affidavit of a gentleman who is now (but was not at the relevant time) the Director of Broadcast Policy of the Opponent. His evidence was not in dispute. It showed that on 30 July 1989 there were in existence certain guidelines prepared by the Opponent for the benefit of its employees and dealing with the subject of the law of contempt of court.

Those guidelines were widely disseminated throughout the Opponent's organisation. Following the decision of this Court on 31 August 1990 the guidelines have been re-drafted in certain respects. It was submitted on behalf of the Opponent that both the original and the amended guidelines demonstrated that at all material times the Opponent has made genuine and serious efforts to draw to the attention of its employees the importance of observing the law relating to contempt of court and to explain to them, in a manner appropriate to the performance of their duties, the practical operation of that law. We accept that submission.