R v Sammut & Anor - [2008] VSC 189

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMON LAW DIVISION

No. 6755 of 2007

THE QUEEN (ON THE APPLICATION OF THE REGISTRAR OF THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA)	Applicant
v
ANITA SAMMUT and WIN TELEVISION VIC PTY LTD	Respondents

---

JUDGE:	HANSEN J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	26 March 2008
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	5 June 2008
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	R v Sammut
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2008] VSC 189

---

CONTEMPT – Criminal trial in the County Court at Morwell – Presentment severed with further trial to follow - Suppression order prohibiting reporting of, or any information derived from, the proceeding – News broadcast on WIN Television in Gippsland region – Broadcast in breach of order – Plea of guilty to breach of order and to charge that broadcast had tendency to interfere with the administration of justice – First respondent journalist responsible for the news item – Second respondent proprietor of the television station – Proceeding against first respondent withdrawn – Second respondent agreeing to pay solicitor and client costs of proceeding - Penalty imposed on second respondent.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr H J Langmead SC and Ms J K Greenham	John Cain, Victorian Government Solicitor
For the Respondents	Mr S A O’Meara	Banki Haddock Fiora

HIS HONOUR:

In this originating motion brought by the Crown two declarations are sought, namely:

(a)That the respondents be adjudged guilty of contempt of Court for broadcasting and publishing a news item on television on 5 February 2007 concerning a criminal proceeding in the County Court when on 29 January 2007 the trial judge had prohibited the publication of any report of the proceeding pursuant to s 80(1) of the County Court Act 1958 (“the Act”);
(b)That the broadcasting and publication of the news item constituted a contempt of the County Court in that it had a tendency or was calculated to interfere with the due administration of justice[1].

[1]As to the practice of including multiple contempts in an originating motion see Rich v Attorney‑General for the State of Victoria [1999] VSCA 14, 30, [45].

The respondents are Anita Sammut and WIN Television Vic Pty Ltd (“WIN Television”). Ms Sammut is a journalist employed by WIN Television, the proprietor of the WIN Television Station which broadcasts in regional Victoria and parts of southern New South Wales. WIN Television is based in Ballarat and has news bureaus in Bendigo, Shepparton, Albury and Traralgon. It also has a subsidiary with a news bureau in Mildura. Each news bureau employs journalists and cameramen and produces local news items to be broadcast in the local area.

Ms Sammut was employed at the Gippsland bureau in Traralgon. The Gippsland bureau had three journalists and three cameramen who covered local items for the Gippsland region, such items being broadcast by WIN Television throughout Gippsland and sometimes through the WIN Network.

At the time of the offending broadcast Ms Sammut was the Bureau Chief for WIN News at Gippsland.…

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 R v Sammut & Anor

Details

AGLC: R v Sammut [2008] VSC 189
Case: [2008] VSC 189
Decision Date: 5 June 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the County Court at Morwell, the court heard a case involving charges of contempt against two respondents for breaching a suppression order during a criminal trial. The respondents were a journalist and the proprietor of a local television station that aired a news segment in violation of the suppression order. This order was intended to prevent any information from the ongoing trial from being reported.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the broadcast had indeed breached the suppression order and whether it had the tendency to interfere with the administration of justice. The court needed to determine the appropriate consequences for such actions, balancing the public's right to be informed with the necessity to maintain the integrity of judicial processes.

The court found that the suppression order had been breached and that the broadcast had a tendency to interfere with the administration of justice. The journalist's proceeding was withdrawn, and the proprietor of the television station agreed to pay the solicitor and client costs of the proceedings. The court imposed a penalty on the proprietor, emphasising the importance of adhering to court orders in maintaining the rule of law and ensuring fair trials.

The final orders included the withdrawal of charges against the journalist, an agreement by the television station proprietor to pay specified costs, and the imposition of a penalty on the proprietor for the breach of the suppression order. The court's decision underscored the gravity of disregarding court-imposed suppression orders and the importance of respecting the administration of justice.

Orders