Refusing to answer questions

Lord Denning

in The Due Process of Law

Published in print January 1980 | ISBN: 9780406176080
Published online March 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780191705113 | DOI:
Refusing to answer questions

More Like This

Show all results sharing this subject:

  • Constitutional and Administrative Law


Show Summary Details


This chapter discusses a case of intense public interest in which two journalists refused to answer questions asked of them in the witness-box. As a result, they were sent to prison. This chapter explains whether they were guilty of contempt of court or not. A preliminary point arose as to the relevancy of the question. A witness is only bound to answer a relevant question, not an irrelevant one. The cases, heard together, were Attorney-General v Mulholland; Attorney-General v Foster. That case made some journalists very angry. The New Statesman published an article by one of them against the judges to which the Daily Mirror retorted with a nice piece of satire. The Mirror recognised that it is the duty of a judge to administer the law as the law stands, and not as some would like it to be.

Keywords: witness; Attorney-General v Mulholland; Attorney-General v Foster; New Statesman; Daily Mirror

Chapter.  1372 words. 

Subjects: Constitutional and Administrative Law

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.