ANDREW STEVENS v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2001] ScotHC 119 (09 November 2001)

ANDREW STEVENS v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2001] ScotHC 119 (09 November 2001)

The application was incompetent because the challenge to the compatibility of section 58 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 with the ECHR was a devolution issue, requiring compliance with Chapter 40 of the Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules) 1996, which the Minuter had not done.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] ScotHC 119
Parties
Minuter: Andrew Stevens; Respondent: Her Majesty's Advocate
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Summary Proceedings; Application for Declaration of Incompatibility / Interlocutory Application—competency of Minute Seeking Declaration of Incompatibility
Outcome
Minute in Application dismissed as incompetent.
Legal Topics
Compatibility of Primary Legislation With European Convention on Human Rights, Devolution Issues, Procedural Requirements for Raising Human Rights Challenges, Right to Silence, Onus of Proof
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Compatibility of Primary Legislation With European Convention on Human Rights Devolution Issues Procedural Requirements for Raising Human Rights Challenges Right to Silence Onus of Proof

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Stevens

Minuter

Her Majesty's Advocate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Summary Proceedings; Application for Declaration of Incompatibility / Interlocutory Application—competency of Minute Seeking Declaration of Incompatibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a challenge to the compatibility of section 58 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 with Article 6 ECHR constitutes a devolution issue
  2. 2 Whether the procedure adopted by the Minuter was competent
  3. 3 Whether a single judge or a bench of three is required to determine a declaration of incompatibility

Ratio Decidendi

The application was incompetent because the challenge to the compatibility of section 58 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 with the ECHR was a devolution issue, requiring compliance with Chapter 40 of the Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules) 1996, which the Minuter had not done.

Court Disposition

Minute in Application dismissed as incompetent.

Orders

  • Sustained first plea-in-law for the respondent.
  • Dismissed the Minute in Application as incompetent.