IceTV Pty Ltd v Stuart Duncan Ross & Ors [2009] NSWSC 731

IceTV Pty Ltd v Stuart Duncan Ross & Ors [2009] NSWSC 731

The court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Mr O'Brien made threats constituting contempt of court. Persistent requests to a witness to provide truthful information to solicitors, and disparaging comments about the defendants to the witness, did not amount to contempt in the circumstances, as there was no sufficient evidence of improper intent, effect, or tendency to interfere with the administration of justice.

Parties
Respondent: IceTV Pty Ltd; Applicant: Stuart Duncan Ross; Applicant: Peter Vogel
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Contempt of Court Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Attempt to Pervert the Course of Justice, Witness Interference, Disparaging Remarks, Affidavit Evidence, Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Attempt to Pervert the Course of Justice Witness Interference Disparaging Remarks Affidavit Evidence Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IceTV Pty Ltd

Respondent

Stuart Duncan Ross

Applicant

Peter Vogel

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Contempt of Court Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether alleged threats or intimidation by Mr O'Brien towards a witness constituted contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether persistent requests by Mr O'Brien for the witness to provide additional information to solicitors amounted to contempt of court
  3. 3 Whether disparaging remarks about defendants made to a witness constituted contempt of court

Ratio Decidendi

The court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Mr O'Brien made threats constituting contempt of court. Persistent requests to a witness to provide truthful information to solicitors, and disparaging comments about the defendants to the witness, did not amount to contempt in the circumstances, as there was no sufficient evidence of improper intent, effect, or tendency to interfere with the administration of justice.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Applicants' notice of motion filed on 21 January 2009 dismissed with costs