Further, the imposition of costs is really in the nature of a penalty for the contempt. The form of the order is unimportant and can be changed when necessary. Strictly speaking it should have been either a formal adjudication of contempt, in which case a fine might have been in form imposed, or a forbearance to make any order on condition of the costs being paid. That was what was done in Littler v. Thompson, 2 Beav. 129, and what has been done here is the same in substance.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.