Her Majesty's Advocate v. Cameron & Ors [2007] ScotHC HCJ_01 (05 January 2007)

Her Majesty's Advocate v. Cameron & Ors [2007] ScotHC HCJ_01 (05 January 2007)

The court held that while the unauthorised use of the RVR was regrettable and unsatisfactory, there was no evidence that confidential or prejudicial information was actually overheard or that the accused's right to a fair trial had been compromised. The risk of prejudice was speculative and not so grave as to justify the exceptional remedy of barring the prosecution. The accused could still receive a fair trial, and neither oppression nor a breach of Article 6 ECHR was established.

Citation
[2007] ScotHC HCJ_01
Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty's Advocate; Accused/minuter: Douglas Colin Fleming; Accused: James Cameron
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Hearing on Plea in Bar of Trial
Outcome
plea in bar of trial refused
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Right to Fair Trial, Confidentiality of Legal Communications, Article 6 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Oppression in Prosecution
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Abuse of Process Right to Fair Trial Confidentiality of Legal Communications Article 6 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Oppression in Prosecution

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Prosecutor

Douglas Colin Fleming

Accused/minuter

James Cameron

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Hearing on Plea in Bar of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unauthorised transmission of court proceedings to a remote viewing room (RVR) during the accused's trial violated his rights under Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and/or constituted oppression or abuse of process such that a fair trial is no longer possible and the prosecution should be barred.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the unauthorised use of the RVR was regrettable and unsatisfactory, there was no evidence that confidential or prejudicial information was actually overheard or that the accused's right to a fair trial had been compromised. The risk of prejudice was speculative and not so grave as to justify the exceptional remedy of barring the prosecution. The accused could still receive a fair trial, and neither oppression nor a breach of Article 6 ECHR was established.

Court Disposition

plea in bar of trial refused

Orders

  • The plea in bar of trial is refused; prosecution may proceed.