Symes v Jonathan Guy Anthony Phillips & Ors

Symes v Jonathan Guy Anthony Phillips & Ors

The appeal was allowed because the proceedings below were unfair: the judge should not have heard both the Norwich Pharmacal (Slade) and contempt proceedings, failed to properly consider mitigation, and left unresolved contempts and a suspended sentence outstanding contrary to proper practice. The sentence was reduced from 24 months to 12 months, and the suspended sentence was discharged.

Parties
Appellant: Robin James Symes; Respondents: Jonathan Guy Anthony Phillips & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (contempt of Court) / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced; suspended sentence discharged; unresolved contempts not to be pursued
Legal Topics
Committal for Contempt, Fair Trial Rights, Legal Professional Privilege, Norwich Pharmacal Orders, Suspended Sentences, Mitigation in Sentencing
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Human Rights Committal for Contempt Fair Trial Rights Legal Professional Privilege Norwich Pharmacal Orders Suspended Sentences +1 more

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

Parties

Robin James Symes

Appellant

Jonathan Guy Anthony Phillips & Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (contempt of Court) / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was deprived of a fair hearing in contempt proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in hearing both the Norwich Pharmacal (Slade) proceedings and the contempt proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed exceeded the statutory maximum and was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the proceedings below were unfair: the judge should not have heard both the Norwich Pharmacal (Slade) and contempt proceedings, failed to properly consider mitigation, and left unresolved contempts and a suspended sentence outstanding contrary to proper practice. The sentence was reduced from 24 months to 12 months, and the suspended sentence was discharged.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced; suspended sentence discharged; unresolved contempts not to be pursued

Orders

  • Sentence of 24 months imprisonment reduced to 12 months (5 months for breach of undertaking, 7 months for sale of Akhenaten statue, to run consecutively)
  • Suspended sentence of 12 months imposed on 22 May 2003 discharged