Patrick Henry McAuley for leave to appeal a decision of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (Court of Session) [2026] CSIH 13 (17 March 2026)

Patrick Henry McAuley for leave to appeal a decision of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (Court of Session) [2026] CSIH 13 (17 March 2026)

Permission to appeal is granted solely on the ground that there is a real prospect of arguing successfully that the Commission erred in law or acted irrationally in failing to conclude that the applicant's correspondence could never amount to a departure from standards of conduct; all other grounds lack merit or real prospect of success.

Citation
[2026] CSIH 13
Parties
Applicant: Patrick Henry McAuley; First Respondent: Scottish Legal Complaints Commission; Second Respondent: Law Society of Scotland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Permission to Appeal Against Eligibility Decision of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted on one ground; refused on all other grounds.
Legal Topics
Eligibility Decisions, Professional Misconduct, Procedural Fairness, Appeals Process
Professional Regulation Administrative Law Eligibility Decisions Professional Misconduct Procedural Fairness Appeals Process

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Henry McAuley

Applicant

Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

First Respondent

Law Society of Scotland

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Permission to Appeal Against Eligibility Decision of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commission erred in law or acted irrationally in failing to conclude that certain correspondence could never amount to a departure from standards of conduct
  2. 2 Whether the complaint was frivolous, vexatious or totally without merit
  3. 3 Whether procedural irregularities occurred in the service of documents

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted solely on the ground that there is a real prospect of arguing successfully that the Commission erred in law or acted irrationally in failing to conclude that the applicant's correspondence could never amount to a departure from standards of conduct; all other grounds lack merit or real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted on one ground; refused on all other grounds.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal is granted on the issue relating to whether the correspondence could amount to a departure from standards of conduct.
  • Permission to appeal is refused on all other grounds.