Legal Research
Cases
Jenkins v Todd (No 2)

Jenkins v Todd (No 2)

Case [2016] NTSC 21 20 April 2016

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Jenkins v Todd [2016] NTSC 21
PARTIES:JENKINS, Trevor
v

TODD, Walter

TITLE OF COURT:  SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY
JURISDICTION:  SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY EXERCISING APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FILE NO:JA 10 of 2015 (21425645)
DELIVERED:  20 APRIL 2016
HEARING DATES:  31 MARCH 2016, 8 APRIL 2016 and 14 APRIL 2016
JUDGMENT OF:  KELLY J
CATCHWORDS:

CONTEMPT OF COURT – Criminal proceedings – Contempt in the face of the Court – Failure to adhere to directions of presiding Judge – Continuous interruption, failure to cease speaking and speaking over the presiding Judge – Whether contempt in that such actions interfered or tended to interfere with course of justice - Contempt found

Supreme Court Rules 2013 (NT) r 75.06
Balogh v Crown Court at St Albans [1975] 2 QB 114; Jenkins v Todd [2016] NTSC 4; Kyprianou v Cyprus (2007) 44 EHRR 27; Muirhead v Douglas [1981] Crim LR 781; R v Jales Brian [2007] EWCA Civ 393; Re Dakin (1887) 13 VLR 522, referred to
Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1; Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525, applied
Ex Parte Tuckerman Re Nash [1970] 3 NSWR 23; Lewis v Ogden (1984) 153 CLR 682; Morris v Crown Office [1970] 2 QB 114; Parashuram Detaram Shamdasani v King-Emperor (1945) AC 264; R v Clement (1821) 4 B & Ald 218; 106 ER 918; R v Davison (1821) 4 B & Ald 329; 106 ER 958; R v Dunbabin & Anor, Ex Parte Williams (1935) 53 CLR 434; Registrar of Court of Appeal v Collins [1982] 1 NSWLR 682, cited
REPRESENTATION:
Counsel:
Applicant:G Macdonald
Respondent:  Self-represented
Solicitors:
Applicant:Solicitor for the Northern Territory
Respondent:
Judgment category classification:    B
Judgment ID Number:  KEL 16006
Number of pages:  59

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY
OF AUSTRALIA
AT DARWIN
Jenkins v Todd [2016] NTSC 21

No. JA 10 of 2015 (21425645)
BETWEEN:

TREVOR JENKINS

Appellant

AND:

WALTER TODD

Respondent

CORAM: KELLY J
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered 20 April 2016)
Part A- Background

[1]On 29 May 2014 Mr Jenkins forced his way past security guards at Parliament House and into the Northern Territory Literary Awards, a private function to which he had not been invited. Police were called and Mr Jenkins was arrested and charged with trespass (count 1), assaulting a security guard (count 2) and resisting a member of the police force in the execution of his duty (count 3).
[2]He was found guilty of all charges in the Court of Summary Jurisdiction, convicted and sentenced to 50 hours of community work (with a $150 victim assistance levy) for the trespass offence, convicted and sentenced to 50 hours of community work (with $150 victim assistance levy) for resisting police, and for the assault, he was convicted and sentenced to 26 days imprisonment, backdated by 26 days to reflect time spent in custody on remand.
[3]Mr Jenkins appealed against his conviction. The appeal was heard by Barr J…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Jenkins v Todd (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Jenkins v Todd (No 2) [2016] NTSC 21
Case: [2016] NTSC 21
Decision Date: 20 APRIL 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Jenkins v Todd [2016] NTSC 21, the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory found Trevor Jenkins guilty of contempt of court in the face of the court. Jenkins had been convicted of trespass, assault and resisting arrest. His appeal against the conviction was heard by Barr J over a period of time. On 21 January 2016, Barr J found that the arrest was not lawful because the arresting police officer had not informed Jenkins of the consequences of his not leaving forthwith, and that he then failed or refused to leave, prior to his arrest. Hence it was not proven beyond reasonable doubt that Jenkins had resisted a member of the police force in the execution of his duty. Barr J set aside the conviction on count 3 and confirmed the convictions (and penalties) for counts 1 and 2. On 21 January 2016, in the course of handing down his decision on Jenkins’ appeal, Barr J directed the Registrar to apply by summons for the punishment of Jenkins for contempt of court arising out of the conduct of Jenkins in court on 20 January 2016 during the hearing of the appeal. The summons was served on Jenkins on 5 February 2016. Jenkins was also served on that date with a copy of the transcript of proceedings on 20 January 2016 and a disc containing a copy of the recording of the court proceedings on that day. He was later given a copy of the transcript of proceedings on 21 January 2016. Jenkins was served with a summons and affidavit and a statement specifying the contempt with which he was charged. The particulars of the contempt with which Jenkins was charged were as follows. Jenkins interrupted the presiding judge while he was speaking and spoke over the presiding judge. The presiding judge informed Jenkins of his intention to charge him with contempt. Notwithstanding the presiding judge informing Jenkins of his intention to charge him with contempt, Jenkins continued to interrupt the presiding judge while he was speaking and to speak over the presiding judge. Jenkins was not present at the hearing of the contempt proceedings. Kelly J determined that Jenkins was guilty of contempt of court as charged. The court found that Jenkins’ conduct in persistently interrupting the presiding judge and talking over him after being directed not to do so and warned that his conduct amounted to contempt, was a contempt in the face of the court.

Orders