Court of Appeal Criminal Division
Published January 23, 2007
Regina v Huggins

Since to commit someone to prison summarily was a last resort, a judge hearing contempt proceedings had to consider whether the need to protect the court process could be achieved by steps other than a custodial sentence.

The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division (Lord Justice Moses, Mr Justice Nelson and Sir Charles Mantell) so stated on January 18, 2006, when quashing an order for committal made by Judge Waller at Croydon Crown Court against Raffael Huggins, who appealed under section 17(2)(b) of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 against a finding of contempt of court.

LORD JUSTICE MOSES, giving the judgment of the court said that the appellant had been in the public gallery of the crown court when his mother had been found guilty by the jury of importing drugs and sentenced to prison for 12 years. He had shouted at the judge and jury in a threatening manner and was plainly guilty of contempt of court.

However, in their Lordships’ judgment, the judge was wrong to give himself only 10 minutes to consider the matter while counsel took instructions from the appellant.

The appellant had offered an immediate and sincere apology and the judge had erred procedurally and as a matter of substance in committing the appellant to custody.

The judge should have dealt with the matter by adjourning the case overnight to give himself time for quiet reflection and to consider the appropriate sentence.

Times Recommends

• Linklaters trounces rivals as UK's biggest firm
• Clifford Chance profits plunge 37 per cent
• Casual drinkers hit by spread of 'dry' zones