Attorney General v Crosland
Jurisdiction: UK Supreme Court
Side A: Attorney General (Government)
Side B: Tim Crosland (Individual)
Core objectives: Whether a barrister who breached a Supreme Court embargo by publishing the outcome of a case 24 hours early should be held in criminal contempt of court
SummaryOn May 10, 2021, Tim Crosland, unregistered barrister and director of the legal charity Plan B, was convicted of criminal contempt of court by a three judge panel of the UK Supreme Court. He was ordered to pay a fine of £5000 as well as the costs of the Office of the Attorney General of the UK.
At an appeal hearing on October 18, 2021, Tim Crosland argued that the Supreme Court judges had disregarded his justifications to proceed to the leak, put in doubt their independence and impartiality, and qualified the fine as "arbitrary and unjust". The Attorney General contended that the European Convention on Human Rights' article 10 did not encompass the right "to be listened or heeded", and that Crosland could not jurisdictionally appeal from and to the Supreme Court.