R v Diallo & Ors (No 10); Re referral of witness KL for contempt [2024] NSWSC 1085

R v Diallo & Ors (No 10); Re referral of witness KL for contempt [2024] NSWSC 1085

KL's conduct constitutes prima facie contempt of court for refusing to answer questions when directed; procedural fairness requires KL be given an opportunity to be heard before referral to the Prothonotary to institute contempt proceedings; referral to the Prothonotary is preferred instead of the summary procedure due to the involvement of the trial judge in the underlying circumstances.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Defendant: Ibrahima Diallo; Defendant: AG; Defendant: AD; Defendant: Panashe Morgan Ryan Karise; Alleged Contemnor: KL
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Ongoing Trial
Outcome
Referral for contempt not yet made; opportunity provided for KL to make submissions before referral
Legal Topics
Contempt in the Face of the Court, Witness Refusing to Answer, Procedural Fairness, Alternative Procedures for Contempt, Protection Against Self Incrimination
Criminal Law Contempt of Court Contempt in the Face of the Court Witness Refusing to Answer Procedural Fairness Alternative Procedures for Contempt Protection Against Self Incrimination

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Ibrahima Diallo

Defendant

AG

Defendant

AD

Defendant

Panashe Morgan Ryan Karise

Defendant

KL

Alleged Contemnor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Procedural Ruling During Ongoing Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether KL's refusal to answer questions when directed constitutes contempt in the face of the court
  2. 2 Whether summary procedure or referral to the Prothonotary is appropriate
  3. 3 The witness's right to procedural fairness before referral for contempt

Ratio Decidendi

KL's conduct constitutes prima facie contempt of court for refusing to answer questions when directed; procedural fairness requires KL be given an opportunity to be heard before referral to the Prothonotary to institute contempt proceedings; referral to the Prothonotary is preferred instead of the summary procedure due to the involvement of the trial judge in the underlying circumstances.

Court Disposition

Referral for contempt not yet made; opportunity provided for KL to make submissions before referral

Orders

  • KL and his solicitors to be advised that the Court is inclined to refer the matter to the Prothonotary to institute proceedings for contempt.
  • KL directed to appear before the Court at 2:00pm on 19 September 2024 to provide submissions as to why the matter should not be so referred.