What is contempt of court in Victoria?
Contempt of court is conduct that defies, obstructs, or undermines the authority of a court or the administration of justice. It is not a single offence with one definition, but a category covering a range of behaviour, from interrupting a hearing to disobeying a court order. As Victoria Legal Aid explains, a court can hold you in contempt if it considers you are ignoring or challenging its authority or a direction it has given.
Because contempt protects the functioning of the justice system itself, it is treated very seriously by the courts. Whether the matter arises in a criminal or a civil setting, understanding what happens after being charged gives useful background, though contempt has its own distinct procedures that can move more quickly than an ordinary charge.
What are the main types of contempt?
Contempt takes several recognised forms, and the type shapes both how it is dealt with and the penalty. The table below sets out the main categories.
| Type of contempt | What it involves |
| Contempt in the face of the court | Disrupting proceedings, or refusing to be sworn or answer as a witness |
| Sub judice contempt | Publishing material that risks prejudicing a fair trial |
| Scandalising the court | Undermining public confidence in the courts, such as a baseless attack on a judge |
| Disobedience contempt | Failing to comply with a court order or injunction |
| Juror contempt | A juror researching a case or disclosing deliberations |
The powers behind these categories differ by court. The higher courts, including the Supreme Court of Victoria, have a broad power to punish contempt that is not capped by statute, which reflects the seriousness with which the system guards its own integrity.
What is contempt in the face of the court?
Contempt in the face of the court is contempt committed in the courtroom or its precincts, and it is the type most people encounter. It covers disrupting a hearing, abusing or defying a judge or magistrate, and refusing to be sworn or to answer questions when called as a witness. In the Magistrates’ Court, section 133 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989 allows the court to deal with this kind of contempt, with a maximum of 6 months imprisonment or a fine of 25 penalty units.
The witness situation catches people out most often. Refusing to answer a question, without a lawful excuse such as privilege, can be contempt, which is why the question of whether you have to speak in court is one worth understanding before you are in the witness box. A court can act on this kind of contempt quickly, so the stakes in the moment are real.
Can you be charged over social media posts about a case?
Yes, in some circumstances, and this surprises many people. Publishing material that creates a real risk of prejudicing a fair trial, while a matter is before the court, can be sub judice contempt, and that includes posts on social media, not just traditional media. Commenting on the guilt of an accused, publishing material a jury is not meant to see, or breaching a suppression order can all create serious risk.
The reach of this is wider than most people assume, because a member of the public sharing a strong opinion about a current case online can, in the wrong circumstances, interfere with a fair trial. The safest course while a matter is before the courts is caution, since the law treats prejudicing a trial as a serious interference with justice regardless of who published the material.
What are the penalties for contempt of court?
They vary significantly depending on the court and the type of contempt. In the Magistrates’ Court, contempt in the face of the court carries up to 6 months imprisonment or 25 penalty units. In the County and Supreme Courts, the power to punish contempt is far broader and is not fixed by a statutory maximum, so the penalty is at the court’s discretion and can include imprisonment, a fine, or both.
What consistently matters is how the person responds. A genuine, prompt apology, and compliance with whatever the court has directed, can significantly affect the outcome, because much contempt law is aimed at securing compliance rather than simply punishing. Anyone facing this, including a self-represented person who has clashed with a court, should understand that the way people who represent themselves in court handle these moments can make a real difference.
Can jurors be in contempt of court?
Yes, and juror contempt is taken extremely seriously. A juror who conducts their own research into a case, for example by searching online for information about the accused, or who discloses what happened in the jury room, commits a serious offence. These obligations are set out in the Juries Act 2000, and breaching them can carry heavy penalties.
The reason is straightforward. A trial must be decided only on the evidence presented in court, so a juror who brings in outside information undermines the entire process and can cause a trial to collapse. Jurors are directed clearly about these rules, and the courts enforce them firmly to protect the integrity of the verdict.
What should you do if you are accused of contempt?
Get legal advice immediately, because contempt can move quickly and the consequences are serious. If you have been warned by a court, ordered to explain your conduct, or accused of breaching an order or publishing something prejudicial, early advice helps you respond properly rather than making the situation worse. You can see how we approach justice administration offences, the category into which contempt falls.
How you respond genuinely matters, because an apology, compliance, and a considered explanation can change the outcome, while defiance rarely helps. If a finding of contempt has already been made against you, it may be possible to appeal the finding or the sentence, depending on the court and the circumstances. Acting quickly and with advice is the best protection.
