Campbell (AP) v Scottish Ministers & Ors [2017] ScotCS CSOH_35 (03 March 2017)

Campbell (AP) v Scottish Ministers & Ors [2017] ScotCS CSOH_35 (03 March 2017)

The pursuer's pleadings, even taken at their highest, do not disclose a relevant case under Article 3 or Article 8 ECHR, as the alleged treatment does not reach the necessary threshold of severity or unlawfulness. The Scottish Ministers are not proper defenders as they had no operational involvement in the acts complained of. Each escort event is a separate act for limitation purposes, and most claims are time-barred. The common law claim is inspecific and not relevant. The action is dismissed against all defenders.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSOH_35
Parties
Pursuer: Mr Easdale Campbell (AP); First Defender: Scottish Ministers; Second Defender: Sodexo Limited; Third Defender: Tasco Services Ltd; Fourth Defender: G4S Care and Justice Services UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Ordinary Action (formerly Judicial Review) / Procedure Roll Hearing on Preliminary Pleas
Outcome
Action dismissed against all defenders.
Legal Topics
Article 3 ECHR (prohibition of Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Article 8 ECHR (right to Respect for Private and Family Life), Prisoner Restraint Policies, Time Bar/limitation, Common Law Residual Liberty, Specification of Pleadings
Human Rights Law Prison Law Administrative Law Article 3 ECHR (prohibition of Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment) Article 8 ECHR (right to Respect for Private and Family Life) Prisoner Restraint Policies Time Bar/limitation Common Law Residual Liberty +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Easdale Campbell (AP)

Pursuer

Scottish Ministers

First Defender

Sodexo Limited

Second Defender

Tasco Services Ltd

Third Defender

G4S Care and Justice Services UK Ltd

Fourth Defender

Procedural Posture

Ordinary Action (formerly Judicial Review) / Procedure Roll Hearing on Preliminary Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the blanket policy of handcuffing prisoners for hospital escorts breached Article 3 and/or Article 8 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's claims are time-barred under the Human Rights Act 1998
  3. 3 Whether the Scottish Ministers are a proper party to the action given their policy role

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings, even taken at their highest, do not disclose a relevant case under Article 3 or Article 8 ECHR, as the alleged treatment does not reach the necessary threshold of severity or unlawfulness. The Scottish Ministers are not proper defenders as they had no operational involvement in the acts complained of. Each escort event is a separate act for limitation purposes, and most claims are time-barred. The common law claim is inspecific and not relevant. The action is dismissed against all defenders.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed against all defenders.

Orders

  • Dismissal of the action against the first, second, third, and fourth defenders.
  • No decree de plano granted.