Jersey Judgment

United Capital Corp. Ltd. v Bender [2007] JLR_Note 1 (23 October 2006)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Material facts

Parties

United Capital Corp. Ltd.

Applicant

Bender

Respondent

02

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Contempt of Court / Judgment

03

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the respondent committed criminal contempt of court

04

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Common law

    Criminal contempt of court involves conduct that obstructs or interferes with the administration of justice.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

Judgment

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> United Capital Corp. Ltd. v Bender [2007] JLR_Note 1 (23 October 2006) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2006/JLR07N001.html Cite as: [2007] JLR_Note 1 [ New search ] [ Help ] United Capital Corp. Ltd. v Bender 2007 JLR Note 1 (23 October 2006) Courts-contempt of court-criminal contempt The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2007 JLR Note 1 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2006/JLR07N001.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.