Her Majesty’s Attorney General (Applicant) v Crosland (Respondent)

Her Majesty's Attorney General sought permission from the UK Supreme Court to pursue proceedings against Timothy Crosland, an unregistered barrister, for contempt of court. Crosland had allegedly breached an embargo on publication of a Supreme Court judgment by disclosing the outcome of an appeal to the press. The appeal, R (Friends of the Earth Ltd) v Heathrow Airport Ltd, concerned the lawfulness of the Airports National Policy Statement and its accompanying environmental report. Crosland had represented Plan B Earth, a respondent to the appeal, and had received a draft of the judgment in confidence prior to its official release. Despite the embargo, Crosland disclosed the outcome of the appeal to the press and on Twitter, asserting his actions were an act of civil disobedience.

The Supreme Court granted permission for the Attorney General to pursue proceedings, finding that Crosland's actions constituted a serious contempt of court. The Court held that Crosland was aware of the embargo and deliberately breached it, intending to interfere with the administration of justice. Crosland's claims that his actions were justified by concerns over global warming and the perceived injustice of the Supreme Court's decision were rejected. The Court found that Crosland's conduct was a serious interference with the administration of justice, undermining the authority of the court and its judgments.

Regarding penalty, the Court imposed a fine of £5,000, considering factors such as the seriousness of the contempt, the lack of remorse shown by Crosland, and the deterrent effect of the penalty. The Court also took into account Crosland's positive character and his pending disciplinary proceedings before his professional body. The fine was deemed a necessary and proportionate penalty to maintain the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.