Jowitts Dictionary English Law

Product Information

Having online access to the books you trust through Westlaw UK can add a whole new dimension to how you work with the commentary and guidance found across the breadth of our titles. 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’. It is open to the Court to cross-examine the contemner and even if the contemner is found to be guilty of contempt, the Court may accept apology and discharge the notice of contempt, whereas tendering of apology is no defence to the trial of a criminal offence. This peculiar feature distinguishes contempt proceedings from criminal proceedings. In a criminal trial where a person is accused of an offence there is a public prosecutor who prosecutes the case on behalf of the prosecution against the accused but in contempt proceedings the court is both the accused as well as the judge of the accusation.

The Bombay High Court in Mohandas Karam Chand Gandhi’s, [1920] 22 Bombay Law Reporter 368 case held that the High Court possessed the same powers to punish the contempt of subordinate courts as the Court of the King’s Bench Division had by virtue of the Common Law of England. Key concepts in the law of the United Kingdom keep changing and developing their meanings, and practitioners need to be sure that they are using and interpreting expressions in accordance with the latest jurisprudence. Jowitt's Dictionary of English Law remains the authoritative starting point, and is regularly cited to and by the courts for this purpose. See, for example, reference to Jowitt for the meaning of "judgment in rem" in Deutsche Bank Ag (London Branch) v Central Bank of Venezuela 2022] EWHC 2040 (Comm) or for the meaning of "retrospective legislation" in Jazztel Plc v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2022] EWCA Civ 232. It is a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation against obstruction and outrage.” ( Frank Furter, J. in Offutt v. U.S.) [2].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. Section 3 of the 1952 Act again reiterated and reaffirmed the power, authority and jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it, as it existed prior to the enactment. It provided that every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, power and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has and exercise in respect of contempt of itself. Similar view was taken by the Nagpur and Lahore High Courts in Mr. Hirabai v. Mangal Chand, AIR 1935 Nagpur 16; Harki- shan Lal v. Emperor, AIR 1937 Lahore 197 and the Oudh Chief Court took the same view in Mohammad Yusuf v. Imtiaz Ahmad Khan., AIR 1939 Oudh 13 1.

Gives a distillation of legal concepts providing a first point of reference for research or for understanding an unfamiliar area of lawThe expression used in Article 129 is not restrictive instead it is extensive in nature. If the Framers of the Constitution intended that the Supreme Court shall have power to punish for contempt of itself only, there was no necessity for inserting the expression “including the power to punish for contempt of itself’. The Article confers power on the Supreme Court to punish for contempt of itself and in addition, it confers some additional power relating to contempt as would appear from the expression ‘including”.

Using ProView means you can connect to and interact with the content you rely on in new ways, wherever and whenever you like. Find out more about ProView. 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 provisionsWestlaw UK's smart navigation, links to primary law in combination with the expertise within our portfolio of books providing you with a seamless, coherent, and integrated research experience every time you need to refer to the text. All eBooks are supplied firm sale and cannot be returned. If you believe there is a fault with your eBook Access-restricted-item true Addeddate 2022-01-22 23:06:27 Associated-names Greenberg, Daniel; Jowitt, William Allen Jowitt, Earl, 1885-1957. Dictionary of English law Bookplateleaf 0002 Boxid IA40334405 Camera USB PTP Class Camera Collection_set printdisabled External-identifier View tables of cases and legislation referred to it the text sorted alphabetically, and link directly to them