“The object of the discipline enforced by the Court in case of contempt of court is not to vindicate the dignity of the Court or the person of the Judge, but to prevent undue interference with the administration of justice.”

—  Charles Bowen

Hellmore v. Smith (2) (1886), L. R. 35 C. D. 455.

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "The object of the discipline enforced by the Court in case of contempt of court is not to vindicate the dignity of the …" by Charles Bowen?
Charles Bowen photo
Charles Bowen 20
English judge 1835–1894

Related quotes

Colin Blackburn, Baron Blackburn photo

“The phrase "contempt of court" often misleads persons not lawyers, and causes them to misapprehend its meaning, and to suppose that a proceeding for contempt of court amounts to some process taken for the purpose of vindicating the personal dignity of the Judges, and protecting them from personal insults as individuals. Very often it happens that contempt is committed by a personal attack on a Judge or an insult offered to him; but as far as their dignity as individuals is concerned, it is of very subordinate importance compared with the vindication of the dignity of the Court itself; and there would be scarcely a case, I think, in which any Judge would consider that, as far as his personal dignity goes, it would be worth while to take any steps.”

Colin Blackburn, Baron Blackburn (1813–1896) British judge

Skipworth's Case (1873), L. R. 9 Q. B. Ca. 232.

Charles Bowen photo

“The law has armed the High Court of Justice with the power, and imposed on it the duty of preventing brevi manu and by summary proceedings any attempt to interfere with the administration of justice. It is on that ground, and not on any exaggerated notion of the dignity of individuals that insults to Judges are not allowed.”

Charles Bowen (1835–1894) English judge

In re Johnson (1887), L. R. 20 Q. B. D. 74.

Mahatma Gandhi photo

“There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supersedes all other courts.”

Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) pre-eminent leader of Indian nationalism during British-ruled India

Young India (15 December 1921)
1920s

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher photo

“In the administration of justice, whether by a recognised legal Court or by persons who, although not a legal public Court, are acting in a similar capacity, public policy requires that, in order that there should be no doubt about the purity of the administration, any person who is to take part in it should not be in such a position that he might be suspected of being biassed.”

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher (1815–1899) British lawyer, judge and politician

Allinson v. General Council of Medical Education and Registration (1894), L. R. [1894], 1 Q. B. p. 758.

Theresa May photo

“We will take back control of our laws, by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK. In future, our laws will be made, interpreted and enforced by our own courts and legislatures.”

Theresa May (1956) Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

Reality Check: Theresa May's Brexit letter https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46344443 BBC News (26 November 2018)
2010s, On Brexit

“So long as Courts of justice remain Courts of justice there must be decency maintained.”

Sir John Bayley, 1st Baronet (1763–1841) British judge

1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 382.
Trial of Hunt and others (King v. Hunt) (1820)

John Romilly, 1st Baron Romilly photo

“It is essential, when persons in trade come into this Court, that they should remember that the administration of equity is founded on perfect truth, and that if persons attempt to mislead the public by stating that which is not true, this Court will restrain them upon a clear case being made out against them.”

John Romilly, 1st Baron Romilly (1802–1874) English Whig politician and judge

Cocks v. Chandler (1871), L. R. 11 Eq. Ca. 449.

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher photo

“The Court ought never to come to the conclusion that two cases in the same Court, or in Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction, are in conflict, unless it is obliged to. I agree that if two cases are in conflict the Court must say with which of them it agrees.”

William Brett, 1st Viscount Esher (1815–1899) British lawyer, judge and politician

Duke of Devonshire v. O'Connor (1890), L. R. 24 Q. B. D. 473.

Nathaniel Lindley, Baron Lindley photo

“As no Court has ever attempted to define fraud, so no Court has ever attempted to define undue influence, which includes one of its many varieties.”

Nathaniel Lindley, Baron Lindley (1828–1921) English judge

Allcard v. Skinner (1887), L. R. 36 Ch. 183.

Related topics