The Law Commission proposes new framework to modernise contempt of court laws

The Law Commission recently published its Contempt of Court Report (Part 1) on Liability, which recommends reforming contempt of court laws in England and Wales. The new framework has been proposed by the Law Commission following a comprehensive review and “aims to make the law fairer and more consistent.”

Over 100 people receive prison sentences each year for contempt of court. The Law Commission says is undertook the review because contempt of court laws “have struggled to keep pace with the rise of online communications and social media.”

Whilst contempt is not a criminal offence, those who are found in contempt may be fined, imprisoned for up to two years or have their assets confiscated.

In July 2024 and in March 2025 the Law Commission published consultation papers on contempt of court laws. Part 1 of its report on the consultation findings identifies “a lack of coherence, consistency and clarity in the law and procedure as it operates across all…courts” and online communications have “changed the publication and information landscape.”

The proposed reforms would remove the current distinct between criminal and civil contempt and instead give all courts the power to act in four situations, including in relation to contempt of court that occurs in a digital context.

General contempt 

• The person’s conduct interfered with the administration of justice in a non-trivial way, or created a substantial risk of a non-trivial interference with the administration of justice; and
• The person intended to interfere with the administration of justice in a non-trivial way.

Contempt by breach of court order or undertaking

• The person breached an order or undertaking; and 
• The person was aware that a breach would be a contempt.

Contempt by publication while proceedings are active

• The person published material which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in active proceedings will be seriously impeded or prejudiced; and
• The person was aware of a risk that proceedings were active.

Contempt by disrupting proceedings

• The person engaged in abusive, threatening, or disorderly behaviour that resulted in the disruption of proceedings; and
• The person was aware that legal proceedings were taking place.

The new framework aims to clarify and codify the elements required to prove contempt and to ensure appropriate balance is struck between the effective and efficient administration of justice, including the protection of fair trial rights, and rights to freedom of expression.
Part two of the report will address remaining issues and will be published in 2026. The Law Commission then says it then will be for the government to consider which recommendations to implement.
The government recently announced plans to abolish jury trials for crimes that carry a likely sentence of less than three years, removing the risk of improper influence of jurors. Furthermore, in some cases, particularly those involving fraud, criminal charges are often more appropriate than contempt proceedings. 

Nevertheless, contempt of court laws will remain an important tool at courts’ disposal to ensure the administration of justice. The development of a clear and consistent contempt framework is to be welcomed, both to make plain to those involved in or commenting on claims what constitutes contempt of court given the sanctions, but also to ensure the courts have the necessary powers to prosecute contempt to protect the interests of parties to litigation.

You can access part one of the report here.