NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales v Rakete [2010] NSWSC 5
HEARING DATE(S) : 7 December 2009
JUDGMENT DATE : 14 January 2010
JUDGMENT OF : Harrison J
DECISION : 1. I find the defendant Te Rana Rakete not guilty of contempt on the first charge. 2. I find the defendant Te Rana Rakete guilty of contempt on the second charge in that I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he performed an act that had a tendency to interfere with the administration of justice
CATCHWORDS : CONTEMPT – where defendant admitted using a camera to film a witness in court giving evidence in a criminal trial before a judge and jury – where defendant charged with two counts of contempt – whether defendant did an act with the intention of interfering with the administration of justice or in a manner that had a tendency to do so – charges to be proved in accordance with the criminal standard – defendant not guilty of the first charge but guilty of the second charge
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Harkianakis v Skalkos (1997) 42 NSWLR 22 Lane v The Registrar of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Equity Division) [1981] HCA 35; (1981) 148 CLR 245 CASES CITED : Parashuram Detaram Shamdasani v King-Emperor [1945] AC 264 The Registrar v Unnamed Respondent (Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Miles CJ, 16 March 1994, unreported) Y and Z v W [2007] NSWCA 329; (2007) 70 NSWLR 377
PARTIES : Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Te Rana Rakete (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2009 / 12446
COUNSEL : L Babb SC with A Mitchelmore (Plaintiff) L Wells SC (Defendant)
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