ICL Plastics Ltd & Ors, Re Application Judicial Review [2005] ScotCS CSOH_35 (11 March 2005)

ICL Plastics Ltd & Ors, Re Application Judicial Review [2005] ScotCS CSOH_35 (11 March 2005)

The Court of Session does not have jurisdiction to review the Procurator Fiscal's decisions in the context of a criminal investigation where no criminal proceedings have been instituted; the deprivation of access to property is temporary, justified in the public interest, and proportionate; the respondent acted within her discretion and powers, and no compelling reason exists to interfere by judicial review.

Citation
[2005] ScotCS CSOH_35
Parties
Petitioners: ICL Plastics Limited and Others; Respondents: Scottish Executive (Procurator Fiscal)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Property Rights, Judicial Review, Common Law Powers, Human Rights Act, Article 1 Protocol No.1, Search and Seizure, Public Interest, Proportionality

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 4 Authorities cited 38 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ICL Plastics Limited and Others

Petitioners

Scottish Executive (Procurator Fiscal)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Session has jurisdiction to review decisions of the Procurator Fiscal in the context of a criminal investigation
  2. 2 Whether the Procurator Fiscal has common law power to exclude petitioners from their property and deny access without a warrant
  3. 3 Whether the denial of access violates property rights under common law and Article 1 of Protocol No.1

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Session does not have jurisdiction to review the Procurator Fiscal's decisions in the context of a criminal investigation where no criminal proceedings have been instituted; the deprivation of access to property is temporary, justified in the public interest, and proportionate; the respondent acted within her discretion and powers, and no compelling reason exists to interfere by judicial review.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition for judicial review refused
  • No declaratory or reduction orders granted