Contempt in the Face of a Court of Summary Jurisdiction
| Published date | 01 April 1939 |
| Date | 01 April 1939 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201833900300209 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Contempt
in
the
face
of a
Court
of
Summary
Jurisdiction
A
COURT
of summary jurisdiction is not a court of record,
and whatever may be the powers of the latter class
of
court in dealing with contempts in the face of the court it is
not to be assumed
that
summary courts have the same
or
similar powers.
It
is
true
that the broad ground upon which power to
commit forthwith for contempt in the face of the court is
given to the superior court, appears equally applicable to an
inferior court,
that
is to say,
that
such power is necessary,
not for the protection of individuals,
but
in the public interest
to ensure that there be no interference with the
proper
administration of the law. At one time, indeed, the view
appears to have been widely held
that
justices sitting .in petty
sessions had the power to commit to prison forthwith for
any such contempt.
There
is a series of cases in which the
point was mooted,
but
the decisions when carefully considered
are not very
helpful;
and
many years ago the then
Law
Officers (Pollock and Follett) advised
that
there was no
such
power at Common Law.
It
is
true
that
this opinion was given
prior to the Summary Jurisdiction Act of 1848, which by
section
12
required
the
sittings of petty sessions to be held in
open court, whereas previously they were usually rather in
the
nature of a private meeting of
justices;
but
it is difficult to see
that this alteration in procedure affords sufficient ground for
any suggestion
that
the opinion may now be disregarded.
Justices will therefore be well advised to consider
that
they have no common law power in the matter. Neither
have they any general statutory
power;
although it is
difficult to see why English justices should not be
vested with a similar power to
that
given to justices
To continue reading
Request your trial