Martin & Co (UK) Ltd, Re Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 [2014] ScotCS CSOH_33 (21 February 2014)

Martin & Co (UK) Ltd, Re Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 [2014] ScotCS CSOH_33 (21 February 2014)

The threats, abuse, and lack of cooperation by Mr Stenhouse and Mr Main did not materially impede the execution of the commission, and no prejudice was caused by any delay. The removal of files by a third party was not shown to have materially affected the proceedings. Therefore, even assuming contempt, it would be disproportionate to allow the proceedings to continue.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSOH_33
Parties
Petitioner: Martin and Co (UK) Limited; Respondent: Mr Kenny Stenhouse; Respondent: Mr Graham Main
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Petition for Contempt of Court Under Administration of Justice (scotland) Act 1972 / Opinion on Proportionality of Contempt Proceedings
Outcome
Minute for contempt dismissed
Legal Topics
Execution of Commission and Diligence, Proportionality in Contempt Proceedings, Obstruction of Court Orders
Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Execution of Commission and Diligence Proportionality in Contempt Proceedings Obstruction of Court Orders

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin and Co (UK) Limited

Petitioner

Mr Kenny Stenhouse

Respondent

Mr Graham Main

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Contempt of Court Under Administration of Justice (scotland) Act 1972 / Opinion on Proportionality of Contempt Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of Mr Stenhouse and Mr Main amounted to contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether it is proportionate to allow contempt proceedings to continue in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The threats, abuse, and lack of cooperation by Mr Stenhouse and Mr Main did not materially impede the execution of the commission, and no prejudice was caused by any delay. The removal of files by a third party was not shown to have materially affected the proceedings. Therefore, even assuming contempt, it would be disproportionate to allow the proceedings to continue.

Court Disposition

Minute for contempt dismissed

Orders

  • Minute for contempt of court dismissed
  • All questions of expenses reserved