21 Dec 2018
Leave to appeal was refused because even if a specific intent to interfere with the administration of justice were required, the facts demonstrated deliberate and knowing breach of the injunction amounting to interference; the lower courts’ factual findings were supported by evidence and there was no sufficient public importance or pending litigation to justify leave.
31 Aug 2018
Each respondent, being within the class of persons restrained by the injunction, after repeated announcements and warnings, remained in the Area and by their presence and conduct materially obstructed or impeded the bailiffs and police executing the injunction; the requisite actus reus and mens rea were established and each respondent is guilty of criminal contempt.
31 Aug 2018
Where persons against whom an injunction is directed knowingly remained in the prohibited area after repeated announcements and warnings and their presence and conduct materially obstructed bailiffs and police executing the injunction, they committed criminal contempt; mens rea is established by intent to do the obstructing acts and need not be a specific intent to obstruct the administration of justice.
12 Aug 2002
The bailiff lawfully executed the distraint warrants because, on entry, the visible signage and labelling bore the defendant's trading name and provided reasonable grounds for the bailiff to believe the goods were in the defendant's apparent possession; production of a Business Registration Certificate in the claimant's name alone did not displace that prima facie conclusion, therefore the application to set aside the warrants failed.