Chamberlain-Davidson, Re Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission [2012] ScotHC HCJAC_120 (25 April 2012)
The Commission's decision to refer the case on misdirection grounds was reasonable and responsible under the statutory test; the court found no reason to interfere and declined to reject the reference.
- Citation
- [2012] ScotHC HCJAC_120
- Parties
- Appellant: Mark Chamberlain-Davidson; Referrer: Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission; Respondent: Crown
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 25 April 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal (reference) / Preliminary Consideration of Reference and Additional Grounds
- Outcome
- Reference not rejected; case continued for sheriff's report on additional grounds.
- Legal Topics
- Misdirection, Corroboration, Admissibility of Evidence, Finality of Convictions, Sexual Offences, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mark Chamberlain-Davidson
Appellant
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
Referrer
Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (reference) / Preliminary Consideration of Reference and Additional Grounds
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sheriff's misdirections amounted to a miscarriage of justice
- 2 Whether intent to rape requires corroborated evidence
- 3 Whether the police interview evidence was improperly admitted post-Cadder
Ratio Decidendi
The Commission's decision to refer the case on misdirection grounds was reasonable and responsible under the statutory test; the court found no reason to interfere and declined to reject the reference.
Court Disposition
Reference not rejected; case continued for sheriff's report on additional grounds.
Orders
- Decline to reject the reference
- Continue case for sheriff's report on proposed additional grounds of appeal
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