PETITION AND COMPLAINT BY HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE AGAINST CRAIG MURRAY [2021] ScotHC HCJ_3 (08 June 2021)

PETITION AND COMPLAINT BY HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE AGAINST CRAIG MURRAY [2021] ScotHC HCJ_3 (08 June 2021)

There are no arguable points of law arising from the applicant's submissions; the contempt proceedings can be treated as criminal for the purposes of appeal, the court's approach to background articles was proper, the test for contempt was sufficiently precise and foreseeable, the sanction was proportionate, and the issues raised do not constitute a devolution issue.

Citation
[2021] ScotHC HCJ_3
Parties
Petitioner: Her Majesty's Advocate; Respondent: Craig Murray
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Petition and Complaint (contempt of Court) / Application for Permission to Appeal to the UK Supreme Court
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Contempt Proceedings, Identification of Complainers, Article 6 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Compatibility Issues, Proportionality of Sanction
Criminal Law Contempt of Court Human Rights Law Contempt Proceedings Identification of Complainers Article 6 ECHR Article 10 ECHR Compatibility Issues +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Petitioner

Craig Murray

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition and Complaint (contempt of Court) / Application for Permission to Appeal to the UK Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether contempt proceedings are 'criminal proceedings' for the purposes of section 288AA of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether the finding of contempt was incompatible with Article 6 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the test applied for contempt was sufficiently precise and foreseeable under Article 10(2) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

There are no arguable points of law arising from the applicant's submissions; the contempt proceedings can be treated as criminal for the purposes of appeal, the court's approach to background articles was proper, the test for contempt was sufficiently precise and foreseeable, the sanction was proportionate, and the issues raised do not constitute a devolution issue.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • application for permission to appeal to the UK Supreme Court refused
  • warrant suspended for four weeks to allow application for leave directly to the UK Supreme Court