MINDSHARE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (TAIWAN BRANCH) v ECKETT [2010] NSWSC 1511

MINDSHARE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (TAIWAN BRANCH) v ECKETT [2010] NSWSC 1511

The defendant admitted contempt by contravening court orders through sending emails and statutory declarations explicitly referencing and disparaging the plaintiff, in clear, contumacious disregard of the orders. Given the seriousness, repeated nature, and admitted motives behind the conduct, deterrence and denunciation require both a significant fine and a good behaviour bond with accompanying educative conditions. Costs are ordered against the defendant on an indemnity basis.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mindshare Communications Ltd (Taiwan Branch); Defendant: Wayne Gregory Eckett
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Declaration of contempt; penalty imposed (fine, good behaviour bond, indemnity costs)
Legal Topics
Contempt—breach of Court Orders, Non Disparagement, Good Behaviour Bond, Fine, Penalty for Contempt
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Contempt—breach of Court Orders Non Disparagement Good Behaviour Bond Fine Penalty for Contempt

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mindshare Communications Ltd (Taiwan Branch)

Plaintiff

Wayne Gregory Eckett

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is guilty of contempt of court by breaching court orders restraining disparagement and disclosure by sending certain emails and statutory declarations contrary to those orders.
  2. 2 What is the appropriate penalty for the admitted contempt?

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant admitted contempt by contravening court orders through sending emails and statutory declarations explicitly referencing and disparaging the plaintiff, in clear, contumacious disregard of the orders. Given the seriousness, repeated nature, and admitted motives behind the conduct, deterrence and denunciation require both a significant fine and a good behaviour bond with accompanying educative conditions. Costs are ordered against the defendant on an indemnity basis.

Court Disposition

Declaration of contempt; penalty imposed (fine, good behaviour bond, indemnity costs)

Orders

  • Declaration that the defendant committed contempt by breaching order 1 made by the Court of Appeal on 10 March 2009.
  • Defendant to enter into a good behaviour bond under s 9 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 within 28 days.