Capilano Honey

Billionaire Seven West Media owner Kerry Stokes faces a second criminal contempt charge in the Supreme Court

On the 2nd of July 2019, I instituted criminal contempt charges against Kerry Stokes, Seven West Media, the Seven Network and others in relation to their conduct in their frivolous and vexatious legal proceedings and contempt charge against me. Kerry Stokes could best be described as a criminal on the run as this is the second criminal contempt charge that Kerry Stokes has personally faced this year and the third one he has had to deal with as his company Capilano Honey has also faced criminal contempt charges.

The latest criminal contempt charges are to some degree the weakest of all the charges, but it is also the most dangerous for Kerry Stokes as he is getting boxed in with nowhere to hide. It’s also possible that it could end up being heard in the High Court of Australia as I have an application pending to have the matter removed from the Supreme Court of NSW to the High Court of Australia.

Below is the video I filmed outside the Supreme Court of NSW when I filed the contempt matter on the 2/7/19.


Kerry Stokes started suing me in 2014 and has instituted 4 matters in total against me. They are all SLAPP lawsuits which are defined as “A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.” (Click here to read more)

Munsie v Dowling

Kerry Stokes, on a personal basis, started suing me in April 2014 for writing about Seven paying Schapple Corby for an interview. His lawyer Justine Munsie also sued me which was given the matter name Munsie v Dowling. They were granted a super-injunction, suppression orders and non-publication orders which were lifted after a few days but then some of the orders were reinstated a few weeks later in what can only be described as a back-door appeal by Justice Peter Hall. Kerry’s son Ryan Stokes also joined the claim in 2015 after I wrote about him abusing his position as Chairman of the National Library of Australia. It was a typical SLAPP lawsuit designed to silence a journalist. (Click here to read more)

Kerry Stokes and Munsie also had me charged for contempt for reporting they were suing me for defamation which at the time breached the suppression orders they were not entitled to. I was fined $2000 but never had to pay it as the Justice Department knew how dodgy it was and they said they would not enforce the fine.

Capilano Honey v Dowling

On the 7th of October 2016 Capilano Honey and its CEO Ben McKee started suing me for injurious falsehood and defamation and were granted a super-injunction, suppression orders and non-publication orders. (Click here to read more) Kerry Stokes was the major shareholder and he still is a substantial holder now. It is Stokes’ lawyers who are running the legal proceeding against me.

On the 10th of October 2016 Capilano Honey’s lawyers had Justice David Davies refer me to the Registrar to institute contempt proceedings against me for breaching suppression orders by continuing to warn people about the health and safety issues regarding Capilano selling fake and poisonous honey.

The super-injunction, suppression orders and non-publication orders were lifted in October 2018, by a single judge and then the Court of Appeal, as there was no legal basis for them and Capilano Honey’s lawyers were caught lying and deceiving the court. I was notified on the 18th of February 2019 by the Crown Solicitor’s Office that the Registrar wouldn’t be charging me with contempt of court as Justice David Davies had instructed.

Capilano Honey was forced in 2018 to stop selling their Allowrie brand honey as it was proven to be imported Chinese fake honey. (Click here to read more) Recently Capilano Honey has admitted on their labels that poison in honey is a problem. (Click here to read more)

In June 2019 Capilano Honey failed to provide evidence to the High Court of Australia that their honey isn’t fake or poisonous. (Click here to read more)

Jane Doe and Ors v Dowling

In December 2016 Seven West Media, on the instructions of Kerry Stokes, paid lawyers to sue me on behalf of a well-known female Channel 7 on-air presenter and a well-known Channel 7 actress. It was because I reported that they had been named by Amber Harrison in a legal document before the Australian Human Rights Commission that they had affairs with Seven West Media CEO Tim Worner.

In February 2017 they instituted contempt proceedings against me for breaching a suppression and I was later sentenced to 4 months jail on the 10th of August 2017.

Two other former Seven female employees, who were also named in the Amber Harrison legal document, were later added to the proceeding which Seven is paying for all of them. None of the women have ever filed affidavits or given evidence denying the allegations. It’s another SLAPP lawsuit to conceal the truth from the public.

Seven Network (Operations) Limited & Seven West Media v Dowling

In about April 2017 Seven Network (Operations) Limited and Seven West Media Limited instituted proceedings in the equity division of the NSW Supreme Court against an unknown party. From memory, I think the matter name at the time was known as Seven v Publisher X or something like that. They claimed the publisher of a website “Seven versus Amber” had continued to publish information that they had suppressed.

At a later date I was made the respondent based on hearsay evidence of Sevens Lawyers Richard Keegan and in about June 2017 they instituted contempt proceedings against me for breaching the suppression orders. It is another one of Kerry Stokes’ / Seven’s / Capilano Honey’s SLAPP lawsuits against me and has been going on for over 2 years yet gone nowhere.

I have now filed contempt proceedings against them as outlined below and both contempt matters are listed to be heard together on the 3rd of December 2019

Criminal contempt charges I have instituted against Kerry Stokes and his companies

Kerry Stokes and his lawyers have basically trained me in how to institute criminal contempt charges as they have instituted criminal contempt charges against me 3 times. Now I am putting that training to use and instituting criminal contempt proceedings against Kerry Stokes and his companies holding them to account for their crimes.

Criminal contempt charge against Capilano Honey, CEO Ben McKee and their lawyers

On Friday (8/3/19) I filed criminal contempt proceedings against Capilano Honey, their CEO Ben McKee and their barristers and lawyers for attempting to interfere with a witness, attempting to destroy evidence and attempting to pervert the course of justice in their poisonous and toxic honey defamation and injurious falsehood proceedings against me.

Capilano’s and McKee’s lawyers include barristers Sandy Dawson SC and Monique Cowden and lawyers Richard Keegan, Martin O’Connor and Alexander Latu and they are all individually named as respondents and face possible jail time. (Click here to read more)

Kerry Stokes, Ryan Stokes, Seven West Media and their lawyers charged with criminal contempt in the NSW Supreme Court

On Wednesday (17-4-19) I instituted criminal contempt proceedings against Kerry Stokes, Ryan Stokes, Seven West Media, their lawyers, their law firm and barrister Sandy Dawson SC.

It’s a very simple case. Kerry Stokes and Ryan Stokes were paying lawyer Justine Munsie from the law firm Addisons to not only represent them in a defamation case against me but also paying Munsie to be an applicant in the matter. The net effect of that is Kerry and Ryan Stokes were bribing Munsie to be a witness. (Click here to read more)

Justice Clifton Hoeben summarily dismisses contempt proceedings instituted by me on the (8/3/19) and the (17-4-19)

Justice Hoeben summarily dismissed my 2 criminal contempt charges in the Capilano Honey matter and also in the Kerry Stokes, Ryan Stokes and Justine Munsie matter. This was scandalous as a barrister had shown up to deal with the directions for the 2 criminal contempt matters and Justice Hoeben’s action to dismiss them seemed to even surprise the barrister.

It’s no surprise that Justice Hoeben did what he did given I was stitched up for 4 months jail last year in part for being found guilty of calling Justice Heoben a paedophile. He should have never been anywhere near the matter.

I can only assume that Kerry Stokes right-hand man Bruce McWilliam has called in another one of those judicial favours he likes to brag about to journalists. (Click here to read more)

Justice Hoeben said I needed leave of the court (permission by the court) to file the Notice of Motion for criminal contempt and he was refusing permission for both matters. He said I would have to file a separate summons which has the effect of starting a new case and would be a lot more expensive for me and also waste more time. (Click here to read more)

Neither of the contempt charges filed by me on the (8/3/19) or the (17-4-19) have been abandoned and I can still reinstitute them at a later date or maybe the High Court will deal with them as I have also filed to have both those matters removed to the High Court of Australia.

Criminal contempt charges against Kerry Stokes, Seven Network, Seven West Media and others

On the 2nd of July 2019 I instituted criminal contempt proceedings in the Seven matter and on the 3rd of July Registrar Walton set down my contempt matter against them and their contempt matter against me to be heard on the 3rd of December 2019. The people I have instituted contempt against are:

  1. Seven Network (Operations) Limited (ABN 65 025 845 262)
  2. Seven West Media Limited (ABN 91053 480 845)
  3. Kerry Stokes – Seven West Media – Chairman
  4. Bruce McWilliam – Seven West Media – Commercial Director
  5. Tim Worner – Seven West Media – CEO
  6. Kieran Smark SC – Barrister
  7. Richard Keegan – Addison Lawyers
  8. Martin O’Connor – Addison Lawyers
  9. Alexander Latu – Addison Lawyers

(Click here to read the Notice of Motion and Statement of Charge) (Click here to read the supporting affidavit)

There will also be a hearing on the 4th of September 2019 for argument regarding orders listed at paragraphs 6 to 17 of my Notice of Motion which includes interrogatories for Kerry Stokes and also discovery.

A huge problem for Kerry Stokes and the other respondents in my contempt charge is that they were allowed to subpoena my computer (off the NSW Police who had it after a malicious police charge driven by Chief Justice Tom Bathurst that was dropped), subpoena my bank records and telephone records etc. So it goes without saying I should be allowed to do the same which I have in my Notice of Motion.

Kerry Stokes is very much on the run now.

Admin: I have set up a High Court of Australia page (Click here) which is in the above menu bar which I will update in the next day with details and then with updates as they occur.

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site, please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options. (Click here to go to the Donations page)

If you would like to follow this website, you can by email notification at the top right or left of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.

Thank you for your support.

7 replies »

  1. It might also be benefical to some degree, if not for right now, but for a later use, to ask Hoeben who, if anyone, he is conspiring with, when he does whatever it is that seems, not only contrary to law, but also contrary to that which a ‘reasonable person’ is expected to do. He may not wish to divulge any other person’s name, be they a jurist/s or a member of the laity, and if he chooses not to mention anyone else’s name, then you may care to help judiciously-jog his memory by just dropping a few scripted names into conversation, and of course, if it is known that any names you may care to mention to Hoeben are names of people whom Hoeben ‘knows’, then he might be enthused to admit that one or several of these named persons (whosw names if he does mention, it’ll more than likely be much to their chagrin!) might have had a hand in helping him to some degree, however miniscule or even to no avail for Hoeben in the very extreme!).

    I doubt that even Hoeben would be so temerarious as to want to avariciously take all the ‘credit’ for his ‘sharp’ shenanigans and keep it all to himself, especially when and if it ever dawns on him that he has now well and truly ‘crossed the Rubicon’ with no turning back for him and any of his cohorts yet to ‘surface’ who may, instead of their continuing to support him in his hours of need, may suddenly up and change their minds before deserting Hoeben and running for the hills.

  2. Is it worth reporting your opposing counsel to the Legal Services Commissioner for investigation? Don`t know the procedure, but it might add pressure.

Leave a Reply