Markisic & Anor v Keelty [2005] NSWSC 1124

Markisic & Anor v Keelty [2005] NSWSC 1124

The statement of charge was defective for lack of allegation of wilfulness; evidence did not establish wilful non-compliance to the requisite criminal standard; suspicion regarding attention to compliance is insufficient to discharge the criminal onus for contempt.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Contempt / Final Hearing
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['disobedience of Court Order' 'subpoena Compliance' 'mental Element in Contempt' 'particularisation of Charge']
['contempt of Court' 'civil Procedure'] ['disobedience of Court Order' 'subpoena Compliance' 'mental Element in Contempt' 'particularisation of Charge']

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

Notice of Motion for Contempt / Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['whether the statement of charge for contempt was deficient' 'whether wilfulness is a necessary element in contempt by disobedience' 'whether the charge was adequately particularised as to date' 'whether there was wilful non-compliance with subpoena']

Ratio Decidendi

The statement of charge was defective for lack of allegation of wilfulness; evidence did not establish wilful non-compliance to the requisite criminal standard; suspicion regarding attention to compliance is insufficient to discharge the criminal onus for contempt.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff to pay the respondents' costs of the notice of motion"]