THE CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE.
J-J-J.XJ wxi xojiaj. j. . vx 1 uwuja J. vaioju* "TO THE EDITOR, Sir— The writer of an article in the Timaru JSvening. Telegraph, re-published in yesterday’s paper, affirms that “Judges and Magistrates possess ‘ almost unlimited ’ power to punish persons for supposed contempt of Court.” This is an error. No doubt the Judges of, the Supreme Court possess virtually unlimited power in this respect; but Magistrates are on an entirely different footing. Their power of punishing for contempt is strictly limited, and the question involved in Mr. Purnell’s case seems to be whether a Magistrate has any power whatever to commit a barrister to prison for alleged contempt of Court, while engaged in discharging his functions and cloaked with the immunities and privileges of his profession.—lam, &c., Lex. July 9th, 1880.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG18800713.2.9.2
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 125, 13 July 1880, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
135THE CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 125, 13 July 1880, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in