Abbey National Plc v Arthur & Anor [2001] ScotCS 263 (19 November 2001)

Abbey National Plc v Arthur & Anor [2001] ScotCS 263 (19 November 2001)

Given the appellants' subsequent conviction and sentence for criminal trespass, it would be inappropriate to impose a further sentence of imprisonment for the earlier breaches of interim interdict; the sentence of imprisonment for contempt is quashed.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 263
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: Abbey National plc; Party Appellant and First Named Defender: Douglas Andrew Arthur; Party Appellant and Second Named Defender: Charlotte Liston Sutherland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (summary Application) / Appeal From Sheriff Court Decision; Interlocutory Appeal in Court of Session
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; sentence of imprisonment quashed; appeal continued on remaining grounds.
Legal Topics
Breach of Interim Interdict, Contempt of Court, Double Jeopardy, Criminal Trespass, Sheriff Court Procedure
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Property Law Breach of Interim Interdict Double Jeopardy Criminal Trespass Sheriff Court Procedure

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abbey National plc

Pursuers and Respondents

Douglas Andrew Arthur

Party Appellant and First Named Defender

Charlotte Liston Sutherland

Party Appellant and Second Named Defender

Procedural Posture

Appeal (summary Application) / Appeal From Sheriff Court Decision; Interlocutory Appeal in Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants should be punished for contempt for breaches of interim interdict given subsequent criminal conviction for trespass
  2. 2 Whether the Sheriff Principal erred by giving no reasons for overturning the earlier dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the court can review the merits of the criminal conviction

Ratio Decidendi

Given the appellants' subsequent conviction and sentence for criminal trespass, it would be inappropriate to impose a further sentence of imprisonment for the earlier breaches of interim interdict; the sentence of imprisonment for contempt is quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; sentence of imprisonment quashed; appeal continued on remaining grounds.

Orders

  • Sentence of imprisonment pronounced on 14 July 2000 quashed.
  • Appeal continued on first and second grounds to a date to be fixed for further argument with intimation to pursuers' solicitors.