Re Glew

In the case, the respondent, Glew, appeared before the Court of Appeal on an application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Glew, a litigant in person, engaged in conduct that was considered disrespectful and inappropriate, including challenging the authority and legitimacy of the court and the judges. The primary judge of the Federal Circuit Court had made orders for Glew to pay costs of the proceedings, and Glew sought leave to appeal against those orders. The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether Glew's conduct had a tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice. The Court of Appeal needed to determine whether Glew's disrespectful conduct amounted to contempt of court and if it had any impact on the conduct of the proceedings.

The Court of Appeal held that Glew's conduct, while disrespectful and inappropriate, did not have a tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice. The Court found that Glew's challenge to the authority and legitimacy of the court and the judges did not impact the conduct of the proceedings. The Court noted that Glew's conduct was not of a kind that would undermine public confidence in the administration of justice. The Court also considered that Glew's conduct did not amount to contempt of court as it did not interfere with or obstruct the course of justice. The Court of Appeal ultimately dismissed Glew's application for leave to appeal against the orders made by the primary judge of the Federal Circuit Court.

The Court of Appeal's decision in this case provides guidance on the scope of contempt of court and the threshold for finding that conduct has a tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice. The Court held that conduct must have a significant impact on the conduct of the proceedings to amount to contempt of court. The Court also emphasised the importance of maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice and the need to balance the rights of litigants in person with the need to maintain order and respect in the court. The Court of Appeal's decision provides clarity on the scope of contempt of court and the threshold for finding that conduct has a tendency to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice.