Tate v Duncan-Strelec [2020] NSWSC 52

Tate v Duncan-Strelec [2020] NSWSC 52

Given the repeat nature and seriousness of the contempt, combined with the defendant's capacity to pay and genuine expression of apology, the Court imposed a fine and a two-year good behaviour bond, and ordered indemnity costs to the plaintiff.

Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas Richard Tate; Defendant: Amanda Duncan-Strelec
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing/penalty Determination
Outcome
Contemnor fined $2,000 and placed on a 2-year good behaviour bond. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
Criminal Contempt, Penalties, Fines, Good Behaviour Bond, Costs
Contempt of Court Equity Criminal Contempt Penalties Fines Good Behaviour Bond Costs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Richard Tate

Plaintiff

Amanda Duncan-Strelec

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Contempt Proceedings / Sentencing/penalty Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate penalty for criminal contempt
  2. 2 Whether repeat contempt warrants increased penalty
  3. 3 Whether indemnity costs are appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

Given the repeat nature and seriousness of the contempt, combined with the defendant's capacity to pay and genuine expression of apology, the Court imposed a fine and a two-year good behaviour bond, and ordered indemnity costs to the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Contemnor fined $2,000 and placed on a 2-year good behaviour bond. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • Ms Duncan-Strelec fined $2,000.
  • Ms Duncan-Strelec placed on a 2 year good behaviour bond.