HM Advocate v Stewart & Anor [2010] ScotHC HCJAC_25 (26 February 2010)
Charge 4 is relevant as it libels two contemporaneous crimes, abduction and assault, with sufficient factual averments and fair notice. The inclusion of both crimes in one charge does not prejudice the defence or impede fair trial, and procedural mechanisms exist to address partial submissions and special defences.
- Citation
- [2010] ScotHC HCJAC_25
- Parties
- Appellant: Elish Angiolini; First Respondent: Lee Donald Stewart; Second Respondent: Colin Stewart
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 26 February 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Charge at First Diet
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Charge Relevancy, Plurality of Crimes, Abduction, Assault, Fair Notice, Special Defence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Elish Angiolini
Appellant
Lee Donald Stewart
First Respondent
Colin Stewart
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Charge at First Diet
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Charge 4, libelling abduction and assault in one charge, is irrelevant
- 2 Whether the framing of Charge 4 prejudices the defence or impedes fair trial
Ratio Decidendi
Charge 4 is relevant as it libels two contemporaneous crimes, abduction and assault, with sufficient factual averments and fair notice. The inclusion of both crimes in one charge does not prejudice the defence or impede fair trial, and procedural mechanisms exist to address partial submissions and special defences.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- sheriff's decision dismissing Charge 4 reversed
- case remitted to sheriff to proceed as accords
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment