His Majesty's Attorney General v Elavi Dowie
[2022] EWCA Civ 1574
HM Solicitor General v Katarzyna Paczkowska
4 November 2022
[2022] EWHC 3458 (KB)
High Court
A woman secretly recorded a court hearing, then put the recording online. The judge said this was breaking the law, and gave her a warning: go to jail for 3 months if you do it again.
Key Facts
- •Katarzyna Paczkowska made unauthorized recordings of Employment Tribunal proceedings in September 2018.
- •She subsequently published these recordings and a transcript online and on Twitter.
- •The Solicitor General brought contempt of court proceedings against her under CPR Part 81 and the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
- •Ms Paczkowska initially sought legal representation but later chose to represent herself.
- •The court considered various adjournments due to Ms Paczkowska's medical claims and difficulties securing representation.
Legal Principles
It is contempt of court to use a recording device in court without leave or to publish recordings of legal proceedings.
Contempt of Court Act 1981, Section 9(1)
The 'court' includes any tribunal or body exercising judicial power, such as Employment Tribunals.
Contempt of Court Act 1981, Section 19
For contempt under Section 9 of the 1981 Act, the prosecution must prove the defendant deliberately made and disposed of the recording with a view to publication; no specific intent to interfere with justice is required.
Solicitor General v Cox [2016] EWHC 1241 (QB) and Attorney General's Office v Andrew Pritchard [2020] EWHC 607 (QB)
In determining the appropriate sanction for contempt of court, the court considers the seriousness of the offence, the defendant's culpability, and the potential harm caused.
Attorney General v Crosland [2021] UKSC 15 and Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Carr [2019] EWCA Civ 392
Outcomes
Ms Paczkowska was found guilty of contempt of court.
The court found that the evidence overwhelmingly proved she made the recordings and published them online, despite warnings. No specific intent to obstruct justice needed to be proven.
Ms Paczkowska was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, suspended for one year.
The court considered the seriousness of the contempt, the lack of evidence of intent to repeat the offense, and Ms Paczkowska's anxiety. A suspended sentence was deemed appropriate due to the recordings being removed and no evidence of repetition.
Ms Paczkowska was ordered to pay the Solicitor General's costs of £8,591.
The court found the Solicitor General's conduct of the proceedings unimpeachable and the costs claimed reasonable given the complexity of the case and the volume of material presented.