Ferguson v Dallow (No 3)

The case of Ferguson v Dallow (No 3) involved a dispute concerning contempt of court charges against the respondent, Mr Dallow. The applicant sought to hold Mr Dallow in contempt of court for breaching two separate court orders. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The court was required to determine whether Mr Dallow had deliberately and voluntarily breached the terms of two court orders, thereby committing contempt of court. This required consideration of whether the orders were clear, unambiguous, and capable of compliance, whether Mr Dallow was served with the orders or had knowledge of them, and whether he deliberately and voluntarily breached the orders.

The court examined the evidence presented, including Mr Dallow's oral evidence and affidavits relied upon by the applicant. The court concluded that the orders made by the primary judges were clear, unambiguous, and capable of compliance. It was established that Mr Dallow was served with the orders or had knowledge of them. However, the court found that the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Dallow deliberately and voluntarily breached the terms of the orders. The court considered Mr Dallow's evidence and submissions, as well as the orders themselves, in reaching this conclusion.

The court found that Mr Dallow was not guilty of the two charges of contempt of court. The court held that the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Dallow deliberately and voluntarily breached the terms of the orders. The court noted that while Mr Dallow had knowledge of the orders and was served with them, the evidence did not demonstrate that he deliberately and voluntarily breached them. The court held that the applicant had not made out the charges against Mr Dallow. The hearing of the interlocutory applications was held over for a hearing on penalty and costs on a date to be fixed.