Defamatory Words used by litigant respecting advocate could not amount to a contempt of Court
In their Lordships' opinion, the words used by the appellant respecting the. Bar, and which must be taken to have been intended by him to refer to Mr. Desai in particular, did not and could not amount to a contempt of Court, and, consequently, there was no jurisdiction in the learned Judge to exercise his summary powers in respect of them.
3. With regard to the words relating to the Taxing Masters, no doubt if a litigant were to suggest in Court that its officers were corrupt or habitually failed to carry out their duties the Court might consider it a contempt, though if it were only the latter that, wag suggested it would be unwise to do so. But when all the circumstances here are considered, and especially that when the words were uttered there was no reproof or even comment from the Bench it is impossible to suppose that they were treated or indeed intended as more than a tactless way of suggesting that Taxing Masters were apt to deal somewhat summarily with such matters as were then in question. It was not till the Advocate-General was moving for punishment on the appellant in respect of the other words that any notice seems to have been taken of the matter and then by the Judge himself, somewhat late in the day as it seems to their Lordships. In their opinion they afford
