CROWN APPEAL BY HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCE v. M.S.W. [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_47 (27 January 2014)

CROWN APPEAL BY HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCE v. M.S.W. [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_47 (27 January 2014)

The sheriff's decisions to adjourn the trial diet but refuse to extend the statutory time bar were inherently inconsistent. Once the trial was adjourned in the interests of justice, it was not open to refuse the extension of time necessary to allow the adjourned trial to proceed. The refusal was therefore reversed...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC_47
Parties
Appellant: Her Majesty's Advocate; Respondent: MSW
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Under Section 65(8) of the Criminal Procedure (scotland) Act 1995 / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Statutory Time Bar for Prosecution
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sheriff's decision reversed
Legal Topics
Extension of Statutory Time Limits, Adjournment of Trial, Vulnerable Witness Applications, Section 275 Applications, Judicial Discretion
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Extension of Statutory Time Limits Adjournment of Trial Vulnerable Witness Applications Section 275 Applications Judicial Discretion

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Appellant

MSW

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Under Section 65(8) of the Criminal Procedure (scotland) Act 1995 / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Statutory Time Bar for Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing to extend the statutory time bar after adjourning the trial diet
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff's decisions on adjournment and extension of time were inconsistent
  3. 3 Proper handling and timing of section 275 applications and vulnerable witness applications

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff's decisions to adjourn the trial diet but refuse to extend the statutory time bar were inherently inconsistent. Once the trial was adjourned in the interests of justice, it was not open to refuse the extension of time necessary to allow the adjourned trial to proceed. The refusal was therefore reversed and the time limit extended.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sheriff's decision reversed

Orders

  • New trial diet fixed for the sitting commencing on 28 April
  • Statutory time limit extended to the end of that sitting