HM Advocate v Cordiner & Anor [2017] ScotHC HCJAC_53 (13 July 2017)

HM Advocate v Cordiner & Anor [2017] ScotHC HCJAC_53 (13 July 2017)

The lateness of the Vulnerable Witness Application did not cause prejudice to the accused, and the witness was found to be vulnerable; therefore, the sheriff's refusal was set aside and the application granted.

Citation
[2017] ScotHC HCJAC_53
Parties
Complainer: Her Majesty’s Advocate; First Respondent: Jennifer Cordiner; Second Respondent: Hollie McKenzie
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Bills of Advocation (criminal Appeal) / Appeal Against Refusal of Vulnerable Witness Application
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Bills of Advocation passed.
Legal Topics
Vulnerable Witnesses, Late Applications, Remote Evidence, Prejudice to Defence

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty’s Advocate

Complainer

Jennifer Cordiner

First Respondent

Hollie McKenzie

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bills of Advocation (criminal Appeal) / Appeal Against Refusal of Vulnerable Witness Application

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing the Vulnerable Witness Application due to lateness and/or insufficient cause
  2. 2 Whether the accused suffered prejudice from the late application
  3. 3 Whether the witness qualifies as vulnerable under the relevant statutory provisions

Ratio Decidendi

The lateness of the Vulnerable Witness Application did not cause prejudice to the accused, and the witness was found to be vulnerable; therefore, the sheriff's refusal was set aside and the application granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Bills of Advocation passed.

Orders

  • Sheriff directed to grant the Vulnerable Witness Application.
  • Processes remitted to the sheriff to proceed as accords.