A.M.E. Fernando v. Deputy Commissioner of Workmens’ Compensation & Others – sllr 2003 volume 2 page 052

In the case between A.M.E. Fernando (Plaintiff, an employee of the YMCA) and the Attorney General (Defendant, representing various public officials and institutions), the court addressed whether the plaintiff’s persistent challenge to a compensation settlement, repeated filing of fundamental rights applications, and disruptive conduct in court proceedings amounted to contempt of court. It was held that the petitioner’s actions did constitute contempt of court, and the summary imposition of a one-year imprisonment sentence, without a formal charge, was justified under the constitutional power to address contempt in facie curiae. The court relied on established common-law principles and precedent (including dicta from Lord Denning), confirming that such summary punishment is permissible to s