NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 122 A Crim R 166
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION : Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v John Marsden [2001] NSWCA 32 revised - 5/06/2001 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40204/2000 HEARING DATE(S) : 05/03/01, 06/03/01, 07/03/01 JUDGMENT DATE : 27 April 2001
PARTIES : Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v John Marsden JUDGMENT OF : Powell JA at 1; Giles JA at 3; Ipp AJA at 21
COUNSEL : (Claimant): W H Nicholas QC/N J Williams (Opponent): In Person SOLICITORS : (Claimant): Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Opponent): In Person CATCHWORDS : CONTEMPT - criminal contempt - standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" - CONTEMPT - knowledge of orders essential element of contempt charges - level of knowledge required - knowledge of substance of orders sufficient - lack of evidence showing requisite knowledge - CRIMINAL LAW - "no case" submission - can be made at close of claimant's case in criminal contempt - standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" - difference between jury trials and cases where judge/magistrate sitting alone - whether it is permissible for judge/magistrate sitting alone to assess evidence qualitatively and make factual findings - "no case" submission question of law - determination of guilt question of fact - preference to keep questions of fact and law separate - wrong for judge/magistrate to make factual findings at "no case" submissions stage. D Re De Beaufeu's Application [1949] Ch 230 Re X [1975] Fam. 47 Re R [1975] Fam. 89 Re F [1977] Fam. Re X [1984] 1 WLR 1422 P v P (1985) 2 NSWLR 401 John Fairfax & Sons Pty Limited v Police Tribunal of New South Wales (1986) 5 NSWLR 465 R v Bilick & Starke (1984) 36 SASR 321 Witness v Marsden ((2000) 49 NSWLR 429 Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525 R v Murphy (1985) 63 ALR 53 R v Serratore (1999) 48 NSWLR 101 CASES CITED: Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Protean (Holdings) Limited v American Home Assurance Company [1985] VR 187 Commissioner for Corporate Affairs v Green [1978] VR 505 Rasomen Pty Limited v Shell Company of Australia Limited (1997) 75 FCR 216 Zanetti v Hill (1962) 108 CLR 433 Haw Tua Tau v Public Prosecutor [1982] AC 136 Torrance v Cornish (1985) 79 FLR 87 Short v Davey, Ex Parte Short [1980] Qd R 412 R v Sutton [1986] 2 Qd R 72 Myers v Claudianos (1990) 100 FLR 362 Cox v Salt (1994) 12 WAR 12 Morrison v Kiwi Electrix Pty Limited (1998) 19 WAR 482 Sun Newspapers & Ors v Brisbane TV Limited & Ors (1989) 92 ALR 535 Attorney-General for New South Wales v Mayas Pty Limited (1988) 14 NSWLR 342 DECISION : 1. No case submission by Opponent upheld; 2. Application dismissed; 3. The Claimant to pay the Opponent's costs.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate