Law Commission Unveils Major Reforms to Modernise UK Contempt of Court Laws

Law Commission Proposes Sweeping Reforms for Contempt of Court

The Law Commission has today, November 18, 2025, unveiled a comprehensive set of recommendations aimed at modernising the United Kingdom's contempt of court laws. The proposals seek to establish a clearer, fairer, and more consistent framework for dealing with conduct that interferes with the administration of justice, replacing a system described as 'disorganised, often unclear and occasionally incoherent'. This first part of the report addresses liability for contempt and the role of the Attorney General, with a second part expected in 2026.

Addressing an Outdated Legal Landscape

The existing law of contempt has developed unsystematically over centuries, leading to a confusing distinction between 'criminal contempt' and 'civil contempt'. This antiquated framework has struggled to keep pace with the rapid advancements in online communications and social media, creating significant challenges for the justice system. The Law Commission's review was prompted by concerns over these issues, particularly highlighted by events such as the Southport murders in July 2024, where the spread of misinformation underscored the need for clearer guidelines on public information during active proceedings.

A New Framework with Distinct Categories

At the heart of the Law Commission's recommendations is the abolition of the confusing civil and criminal contempt distinction. In its place, the Commission proposes a new framework comprising three distinct forms of contempt:

• General contempt: This category would encompass conduct that interferes with the administration of justice, such as disrupting court proceedings or abusing court staff.
• Contempt by breach of order or undertaking: This applies to deliberate breaches of court orders or undertakings.
• Contempt by publication when proceedings are active: This addresses the publication of material that poses a substantial risk of seriously prejudicing a trial.

These changes are designed to make the law 'easier to understand, fairer, and that better protects the administration of justice'.

Key Reforms for Clarity and Consistency

The recommendations introduce several significant reforms to enhance clarity and consistency:

• Definition of 'Active' Proceedings: Criminal proceedings will now be considered 'active' from the point of charge, rather than arrest. This aims to provide greater clarity for publishers and the media regarding what can be reported without risking prejudice to a fair trial.
• Publication Guidelines: The Commission advises that publishing details such as a suspect's name, age, nationality, ethnicity, religion, or immigration status will 'generally not create risk' of contempt, though the specific context of each case remains crucial.
• Expanded Powers for Tribunals: Many tribunals currently lack the necessary powers to address contempt. The new framework proposes extending contempt protection and powers to these bodies, enabling them to control their proceedings more effectively.
• Sentencing Options: While the maximum sentence of two years imprisonment for contempt is proposed to be retained, the Commission suggests expanding sentencing options to include community orders, such as unpaid work or drug and alcohol treatment.
• Criminal Records: A key recommendation is that a finding of contempt should not be entered on the Police National Computer or appear on a criminal records check, as contempt is not classified as a criminal offence.

Professor Penney Lewis, the Commissioner for Criminal Law, emphasised that the review found 'significant problems with coherence, consistency and clarity across civil, criminal and family courts'. The Attorney General will retain powers to initiate contempt proceedings in the public interest.