Gap Constructions Pty Ltd v Vigar Pty Limited [2011] NSWSC 1061

Gap Constructions Pty Ltd v Vigar Pty Limited [2011] NSWSC 1061

Although the contempt was proven and was a serious wilful disregard of the Court's orders, the plaintiffs had purged the contempt by providing full disclosure and an apology; the contempt had no actual or potential consequence for the substantive issues beyond delay, was not committed in a criminal context, produced no benefit or gain, and the plaintiffs showed genuine contrition, exemplary antecedents and no prior convictions. The Court therefore deemed it inexpedient to inflict punishment and dismissed the charge under s10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), while ordering indemnity costs against the plaintiffs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Sentence for Contempt / Submissions on Sentence After Finding of Contempt
Outcome
The charges against the first and second plaintiffs are dismissed under s10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).
Legal Topics
['failure to Comply With Court Orders' 'purging Contempt' 'sentencing for Contempt' 'indemnity Costs' 'dismissal Under S10 of the Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (nsw)']
['contempt' 'civil Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['failure to Comply With Court Orders' 'purging Contempt' 'sentencing for Contempt' 'indemnity Costs' 'dismissal Under S10 of the Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (nsw)']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Sentence for Contempt / Submissions on Sentence After Finding of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed on the first and second plaintiffs after they were found guilty of contempt for failure to comply with court orders.' "Whether the plaintiffs' subsequent compliance and apology purged the contempt and made it inexpedient to inflict punishment." "Whether the plaintiffs should pay the defendants' costs on an indemnity basis."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the contempt was proven and was a serious wilful disregard of the Court's orders, the plaintiffs had purged the contempt by providing full disclosure and an apology; the contempt had no actual or potential consequence for the substantive issues beyond delay, was not committed in a criminal context, produced no benefit or gain, and the plaintiffs showed genuine contrition, exemplary antecedents and no prior convictions. The Court therefore deemed it inexpedient to inflict punishment and dismissed the charge under s10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), while ordering indemnity costs against the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

The charges against the first and second plaintiffs are dismissed under s10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).

Orders

  • ['The charges against the first and second plaintiffs are dismissed.' "The plaintiffs are to pay the defendants' costs of the 23 August 2011 application and today's judgment on an indemnity basis."]