Contempt of Court Act 1981 (Version in vigour from 2023-10-24 to )
| Currency | Unapplied prospective |
| Coming into Force | 24 October 2023 |
| commencementStatus | In Force |
Contempt of Court Act 1981
1981 CHAPTER 49
An Act to amend the law relating to contempt of court and related matters.
[27th July 1981]
Commencement Information
I1
Act not in force at Royal Assent. Act partly in force at 27.8.1981 see s.21(2)(3).
Modifications etc. (not altering text)
C1
By Criminal Justice Act 1991 (c. 53, SIF 39:1), s. 101(1), Sch. 12 para. 23; S.I. 1991/2208, art. 2(1), Sch. 1 it is provided (14.10.1991) that in relation to any time before the commencement of s. 70 of that 1991 Act (which came into force on 1.10.1992 by S.I. 1992/333, art. 2(2), Sch. 2) references in any enactment amended by that 1991 Act, to youth courts shall be construed as references to juvenile courts.
In this Act “
the strict liability rule
” means the rule of law whereby conduct may be treated as a contempt of court as tending to interfere with the course of justice in particular legal proceedings regardless of intent to do so.
(1)
The strict liability rule applies only in relation to publications, and for this purpose “
publication
” includes any speech, writing,
F1
programme included in a cable programme service
or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.
(2)
The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.
(3)
The strict liability rule applies to a publication only if the proceedings in question are active within the meaning of this section at the time of the publication.
(4)
Schedule 1 applies for determining the times at which proceedings are to be treated as active within the meaning of this section.
(5)
F2
In this section “
programme service
” has the same meaning as in the Broadcasting Act 1990.
Amendments (Textual)
F1
Words substituted by Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42, SIF 96), s. 203(1), Sch. 20 para. 31(1)(a): words were previously added by Broadcasting Act 1984 (c. 46 SIF 96), s. 57(1), Sch. 5 para. 39(1)
F2
S. 2(5) inserted by Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42, SIF 96), s. 203(1), Sch. 20, para. 31(1)(b)
(1)
A person is not guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule as the publisher of any matter to which that rule applies if at the time of publication (having taken all reasonable care) he does not know and has no reason to suspect that relevant proceedings are active.
(2)
A person is not guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule as the distributor of a publication containing any such matter if at the time of distribution (having taken all reasonable care) he does not know that it contains such matter and has no reason to suspect that it is likely to do so.
(3)
The burden of proof of any fact tending to establish a defence afforded by this section to any person lies upon that person.
(4)
F3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amendments (Textual)
F3
S. 3(4) repealed (22.7.2004) by Statute Law (Repeals) Act 2004 (c. 14), Sch. 1 Pt. 1 Group 4
(1)
Subject to this section a person is not guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule in respect of a fair and accurate report of legal proceedings held in public, published contemporaneously and in good faith.
(2)
In any such proceedings the court may, where it appears to be necessary for avoiding a substantial risk of prejudice to the administration of justice in those proceedings, or in any other proceedings pending or imminent, order that the publication of any report of the proceedings, or any part of the proceedings, be postponed for such period as the court thinks necessary for that purpose.
(2A)
F4
Where in proceedings for any offence which is an administration of justice offence for the purposes of section 54 of the
M1
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (acquittal tainted by an administration of justice offence) it appears to the court that there is a possibility that (by virtue of that section) proceedings may be taken against a person for an offence of which he has been acquitted, subsection (2) of this section shall apply as if those proceedings were pending or imminent.
(3)
For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section
F5
. . . a report of proceedings shall be treated as published contemporaneously—
(a)
in the case of a report of which publication is postponed pursuant to an order under subsection (2) of this section, if published as soon as practicable after that order expires;
(b)
F6
in the case of a report of allocation or sending proceedings of which publication is permitted by virtue only of subsection (6) of section 52A of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (“
the 1998 Act
”), if published as soon as practicable after publication is so permitted;
(c)
in the case of a report of an application of which publication is permitted by virtue only of sub-paragraph (5) or (7) of paragraph 3 of Schedule 3 to the 1998 Act, if published as soon as practicable after publication is so permitted.
(4)
F7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amendments (Textual)
F4
S. 4(2A) inserted (E.W.,N.I.) (4.7.1996 with effect as mentioned in s. 54(4)(7)(8) of the amending Act) by 1996 c. 25, ss. 54(4)(7)(8), 57(3) (with s. 78(1)); S.I. 1997/1504
F5
Words in s. 4(3) repealed (4.9.1996 so far as consequential on ss. 1, 5, 6, 12, 13, 16 of the repealing Act and 1.4.1999 so far as consequential on ss. 14, 15, 17, Sch. 1 of the repealing Act and 28.2.2000 (E.W.) so far as not already in force and 31.3.2001 (S.) so far as not already in force and 6.1.2010 (N.I.) so far as not already in force) by 1996 c. 31, s. 16 {Sch. 2} (with s. 20(2)); S.I. 1999/817, art. 2(b); S.I. 2000/222, art. 3(b); S.S.I. 2001/98, art. 3(a)(b)(i); S.I. 2009/2858, art. 3(d)
F6
S. 4(3)(b)(c) substituted for s. 4(3)(b) (18.6.2012) by Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44), s. 336(3)(4), Sch. 3 para. 53; S.I. 2012/1320, art. 3(d)(iv) (with art. 6(2))
F7
S. 4(4) repealed (22.7.2004) by Statute Law (Repeals) Act 2004 (c. 14), Sch. 1 Pt. 1 Group 4
Marginal Citations
M1
1996 c. 00.
A publication made as or as part of a discussion in good faith of public affairs or other matters of general public interest is not to be treated as a contempt of court under the strict liability rule if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion.
Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Act—
(a)
prejudices any defence available at common law to a charge of contempt of court under the strict liability rule;
(b)
implies that any publication is punishable as contempt of court under that rule which would not be so punishable apart from those provisions;
(c)
restricts liability for contempt of court in respect of conduct intended to impede or prejudice the administration of justice.
Proceedings for a contempt of court under the strict liability rule (other than Scottish proceedings) shall not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Attorney General or on the motion of a court having jurisdiction to deal with it.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting