Laverie v The Scottish Ministers [2017] ScotCS CSOH_45 (17 March 2017)

Laverie v The Scottish Ministers [2017] ScotCS CSOH_45 (17 March 2017)

The court held that the office of board member and its associated rights are not civil rights for the purposes of Article 6(1) ECHR, as they are unpaid, public law positions with no private or economic aspect. The petitioner’s removal and disqualification did not engage Article 6(1), Article 11, or Article 1 Protocol 1. The process followed by the Scottish Ministers was fair and proportionate, and the petitioner was not subject to an unlawful or irrational decision. The plea of mora, taciturnity and acquiescence was not established, as the petitioner acted expeditiously and did not acquiesce.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSOH_45
Parties
Petitioner: Peter Laverie; Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session – Opinion
Outcome
Petition refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Removal From Public Office, Disqualification From Office, European Convention on Human Rights, Natural Justice, Proportionality, Legislative Competence
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Removal From Public Office Disqualification From Office European Convention on Human Rights Natural Justice +2 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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Laverie

Petitioner

The Scottish Ministers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session – Opinion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the removal of the petitioner from the Board and his lifelong disqualification engaged or breached Article 6(1), Article 11, and Article 1 Protocol 1 of the ECHR;
  2. 2 Whether the Scottish Ministers' decision was irrational or breached natural justice at common law;
  3. 3 Whether the petition was barred by mora, taciturnity and acquiescence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the office of board member and its associated rights are not civil rights for the purposes of Article 6(1) ECHR, as they are unpaid, public law positions with no private or economic aspect. The petitioner’s removal and disqualification did not engage Article 6(1), Article 11, or Article 1 Protocol 1. The process followed by the Scottish Ministers was fair and proportionate, and the petitioner was not subject to an unlawful or irrational decision. The plea of mora, taciturnity and acquiescence was not established, as the petitioner acted expeditiously and did not acquiesce.

Court Disposition

Petition refused

Orders

  • Plea of mora, taciturnity and acquiescence repelled
  • Petition for judicial review refused