BEGGS v THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2017] ScotCS CSIH_62 (11 October 2017)
It is not competent for the court to exercise powers under Rule of Court 38.10 to allow a late appeal where the statutory 7-day time limit in section 27D(2) of the Court of Session Act 1988 has expired. The rules cannot override the statutory time limit.
- Citation
- [2017] ScotCS CSIH_62
- Parties
- Petitioner: William Frederick Ian Beggs; Respondents: Scottish Ministers
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 11 October 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Motion to Allow Late Appeal (reclaiming Motion) After Refusal of Permission to Proceed on Certain Grounds
- Outcome
- Motion refused; Reclaiming Motion refused as incompetent.
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Time Limits, Appeals, Court Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
William Frederick Ian Beggs
Petitioner
Scottish Ministers
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Motion to Allow Late Appeal (reclaiming Motion) After Refusal of Permission to Proceed on Certain Grounds
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court has discretion to allow a late appeal (Reclaiming Motion) under Rule of Court 38.10 in the context of the statutory 7-day time limit in section 27D(2) of the Court of Session Act 1988
Ratio Decidendi
It is not competent for the court to exercise powers under Rule of Court 38.10 to allow a late appeal where the statutory 7-day time limit in section 27D(2) of the Court of Session Act 1988 has expired. The rules cannot override the statutory time limit.
Court Disposition
Motion refused; Reclaiming Motion refused as incompetent.
Orders
- Refusal of motion to allow late appeal (Reclaiming Motion)
- Refusal of Reclaiming Motion as incompetent under Rule of Court 38.12(7)(a)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment