Errington v Wilson [1995] ScotCS CSIH_2 (16 June 1995)

Errington v Wilson [1995] ScotCS CSIH_2 (16 June 1995)

In the circumstances of this statutory hearing, fairness and natural justice required that the petitioner be allowed to cross examine the food authority’s witnesses. The refusal to permit cross examination was a denial of natural justice and rendered the decision unlawful, regardless of whether the justice was acting administratively or judicially.

Citation
[1995] ScotCS CSIH_2
Parties
Petitioner: H J Errington & Co (Errington); First Respondent: Justice of the Peace (first respondent); Second Respondent: Clydesdale District Food Authority (second respondent); Third Respondent: Authorised Officer of Clydesdale District Food Authority (third respondent)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 June 1995
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (petition for Reduction) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Before the First Division, Court of Session
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to; decision of the justice of the peace quashed (reduced).
Legal Topics
Natural Justice, Right to Cross Examination, Procedural Fairness, Food Safety Act 1990, Judicial/administrative Distinction
Administrative Law Food Safety Law Judicial Review Natural Justice Right to Cross Examination Procedural Fairness Food Safety Act 1990 Judicial/administrative Distinction

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H J Errington & Co (Errington)

Petitioner

Justice of the Peace (first respondent)

First Respondent

Clydesdale District Food Authority (second respondent)

Second Respondent

Authorised Officer of Clydesdale District Food Authority (third respondent)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (petition for Reduction) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Before the First Division, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to allow cross examination at a statutory food safety hearing was a denial of natural justice/fair hearing
  2. 2 Whether the justice was acting in a judicial/quasi-judicial or administrative capacity and the implications for procedural rights
  3. 3 Whether prejudice must be averred to establish breach of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

In the circumstances of this statutory hearing, fairness and natural justice required that the petitioner be allowed to cross examine the food authority’s witnesses. The refusal to permit cross examination was a denial of natural justice and rendered the decision unlawful, regardless of whether the justice was acting administratively or judicially.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to; decision of the justice of the peace quashed (reduced).

Orders

  • The decision of the justice of the peace dated 3 March 1995 is reduced (quashed).
  • The reclaiming motion by the second and third respondents is refused.