Jowitts Dictionary English Law

Product Information

Section 5 further expanded the jurisdiction of the High Court for indicting a person in respect of contempt committed outside the local limits of its jurisdiction. The Parliamentary legislation did not confer any new or fresh power or jurisdiction on the High Courts in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it, instead it reaffirmed the inherent power of a Court of Record, having same jurisdiction, power and authority as it has been exercising prior to the enactments.

Jowitt is also the starting point for research in relation to new or unfamiliar legal concepts, and the Sixth Edition fully updates readers on the wide range of new concepts introduced by legislation in the last few years, from specialist terms such as "biodiversity net gain" in the Environment Act 2021 or "no fault divorce" in the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020, to a wide range of updated terms of general importance such as burden of proof, legacy and mediation, among many others. Provides a concise, but comprehensive and authoritative, definition of each expression which forms part of the fabric of English lawThe High Court as a court of record and as the protector of public justice throughout its jurisdiction has power to deal with contempts directed against the administration of justice, whether those contempts are committed in face of the court or outside it, and independently or whether the particular court is sitting or not sitting, and whether those contempts relate to proceedings directly concerning itself or whether they relate to proceedings concerning an inferior court, and in the latter case whether those proceedings might or might not at some stage come before the High Court.” The question whether in the absence of any express provision a Court of Record has inherent power in respect of contempt of subordinate or inferior courts, has been considered by English and Indian Courts. In Sukhdev Singh Sodhi v. The Chief Justice and Judges of the PEPSU High Court, [1954] SCR 454, supreme Court considered the origin, history and development of the concept of inherent jurisdiction of a court of record in India. The Court after considering Privy Council and High Courts’ decisions held that the High Court being a court of record has inherent power to punish for contempt of subordinate courts. The Court further held that even after the codification of the law of contempt in India the High Court’s jurisdiction as a court of record to initiate proceedings and take seisin of the matter remained unaffected by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926. The power to punish for contempt even in the absence of express provisions Note. The books in the Reserve Collection are available to all categories of readers, not just those on the particular course.

Supreme Court to be a court of record. — The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.’ In Surendra Nath Banerjee v. The Chief Justice and Judges of the High Court at Fort William in Bengal, ILR to Calcutta 109 the High Court of Calcutta in 1883 convicted Surendra Nath Banerjee, who was Editor and Proprietor of Weekly newspaper for contempt of court and sentenced him to imprisonment for two months for publishing libel reflecting upon a Judge in his judicial capacity. Lccn 2010497308 Ocr tesseract 5.0.0-1-g862e Ocr_detected_lang en Ocr_detected_lang_conf 1.0000 Ocr_detected_script Latin Ocr_detected_script_conf 1.0000 Ocr_module_version 0.0.14 Ocr_parameters -l eng Old_pallet IA-WL-2000073 Openlibrary_edition When you search SOLO for books on your Oxford Law Faculty Reading List you may findthat the location is shown as Law Library Reserve Collection. Books in the Law Reservecollection must be asked for at the Enquiry Desk on Level 2. Please remember to bring your Oxford University Card or your Bodleian Reader's Card when you come to the Desk. Court of Record is a court where acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled in parchment for a perpetual memorial and testimony, which rolls are called the “record” of the court, and are of such high and super eminent authority that their truth is not to be questioned.”The judgment prepared with great learning and erudition could not be delivered as the proceedings were dropped following the change of Government. After long interval Wilmot’s judgment was published in 1802. The judgment proceeded on the assumption that the superior Common Law Courts did have the power to indict a person for contempt of court, by following a summary procedure on the principle that this power was ‘a necessary incident to every court of justice’.

In India prior to the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926, High Court’s jurisdiction in respect of contempt of subordinate and inferior courts was regulated by the principles of Common Law of England. The High Courts in the absence of statutory provision exercised power of contempt to protect the subordinate courts on the premise of inherent power of a Court of Record. The summary power of punishment for contempt has been conferred on the courts to keep a blaze of glory around them, to deter people from attempting to render them contemptible in the eyes of the public. These powers are necessary to keep the course of justice free, as it is of great importance to society.” (Oswald on Contempt of Court). A court whereof the acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled for a perpetual memorial and testimony, and which has power to fine and imprison for contempt of its authority.” In England a superior court of record has been exercised power to indict a person for the contempt of its authority and also for the contempt of its subordinate and inferior courts in a summary manner without the aid and assistance of Jury. This power was conceded as a necessary attribute of a superior court of record under Anglo Saxon System of Jurisprudence. The Contempt of Courts Act 1971 was enacted to define and limit the powers of courts in punishing contempts of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto . Section 2 of the Act defines contempt of court including criminal contempt. Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 specify matters which do not amount to contempt and the defence which may be taken. Section 10 which relates to the power of High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate courts.

Discover

Provides an authoritative point of reference for research or for understanding any unfamiliar term or area of law The Supreme Court and the High Court both exercise concurrent jurisdiction under the constitutional scheme in matters relating to fundamental rights under Article 32 and 226 of the Constitution, therefore this Court’s jurisdiction and power to take action for contempt of subordinate courts would not be inconsistent to any constitutional scheme.

Article 129 declares the Supreme Court a court of record and it further provides that the Supreme Court shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself. or interferes, or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.” urn:lcp:jowittsdictionar0001unse_n3b6:epub:7b2c9349-ada4-490d-90ca-b353689b55c6 Foldoutcount 0 Identifier jowittsdictionar0001unse_n3b6 Identifier-ark ark:/13960/s2v5zzng0c4 Invoice 1652 Isbn 9781847036261But, the Calcutta High Court took a contrary view in Legal Remembrancer v. Motilal Ghosh, ILR 41 Cal. 173 holding that there was no such inherent power with the High Court. In India, the courts have followed the English practice in holding that a court of record has power of summarily punishing contempt of itself as well as of subordinate courts. Thoroughly revised and updated since the last edition in 1977, this new edition covers English law from earliest times up to the present day, providing detailed explanations of legal terms as well as their historical context.