NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of NSW v A [2017] NSWSC 495 Hearing dates: 20 April 2017 Date of orders: 01 May 2017 Decision date: 01 May 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Bellew J Decision: (1) The contemnor is convicted. (2) The contemnor is sentenced to a period of 12 months imprisonment to date from 1 May 2017. (3) I suspend the execution of the whole of the sentence in Order (2) for a period 12 months to date from 1 May 2017. (4) I direct that the contemnor be released from custody immediately on the condition that he enter into a good behaviour bond for a term of 12 months commencing on 1 May 2017. (5) I make no order as to costs. Catchwords: CONTEMPT OF COURT – Where contemnor refused to take oath or affirmation and give evidence – Where contemnor warned of the consequences and adhered to his position – Where reasons for the contempt stemmed from concerns held by the contemnor as to his safety – Where contempt was subsequently purged and the evidence was given – Serious nature of the offending – Particular need for general deterrence – Sentence of imprisonment warranted – Order made that sentence be wholly suspended Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) District Court Act 1973 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) Cases Cited: Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court (NSW) v Jando (2001) 53 NSWLR 527; [2001] NSWSC 969 R v Foster [2001] NSWCCA 215 R v JCE [2000] NSWCCA 498 R v Razzak [2006] NSWSC 1366 R v Roach [2005] VSCA 162 R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 R v Zamagias [2002] NSWCCA 17 Registrar of the Court of Appeal v Gilby [1991] NSWCA 235 Registrar of the Court of Appeal v Maniam [No. 2] (1992) 26 NSWLR 309 Registrar of the Court of Appeal v Raad [1992] NSWCA 207 Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court of New South Wales v Tran [2006] NSWSC 1183; (2006) 166 A Crim R 393 Tiknius v R [2011] NSWCCA 215 Wood v Staunton (No. 5) (1996) 86 A Crim R 183 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of NSW – Plaintiff A – Contemnor Representation: Counsel: D Kell SC and M Pulsford – Plaintiff D Dalton SC – Contemnor
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