Appeal in the cause Kenneth Prentice against Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 19 (17 June 2025)

Appeal in the cause Kenneth Prentice against Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 19 (17 June 2025)

The sheriff exercised his discretion correctly in refusing to award expenses to the appellant, as there was no evidence of bad faith, improper motive, irrationality, or unreasonableness by the respondent. The appellant's arguments regarding the suitability review and warrant application were not raised at proof and do not justify a departure from the normal rule that no expenses are awarded against public bodies in such cases.

Citation
[2025] SACCIV 19
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: Kenneth Prentice; Defender and Respondent: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Sheriff's Decision on Expenses After Recall of Shotgun Certificate Revocation
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Expenses in Litigation, Discretionary Decisions, Firearms Licensing, Statutory Guidance, Judicial Review of Public Body Decisions
Administrative Law Licensing Law Civil Procedure Expenses in Litigation Discretionary Decisions Firearms Licensing Statutory Guidance Judicial Review of Public Body Decisions

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Prentice

Pursuer and Appellant

Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Sheriff's Decision on Expenses After Recall of Shotgun Certificate Revocation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing to award expenses to the appellant after recall of shotgun certificate revocation
  2. 2 Whether failure to document a suitability review or alleged impropriety in warrant application justified an award of expenses against a public body

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff exercised his discretion correctly in refusing to award expenses to the appellant, as there was no evidence of bad faith, improper motive, irrationality, or unreasonableness by the respondent. The appellant's arguments regarding the suitability review and warrant application were not raised at proof and do not justify a departure from the normal rule that no expenses are awarded against public bodies in such cases.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • No expenses due to or by either party for the appeal or related hearings
  • Interlocutor to be issued to that effect