Bill for Criminal Letters by AB against Paul Cooney (High Court of Justiciary) [2024] HCJAC 40 (29 October 2024)

Bill for Criminal Letters by AB against Paul Cooney (High Court of Justiciary) [2024] HCJAC 40 (29 October 2024)

The court held that the requirement for exceptional circumstances remains where the Lord Advocate has refused concurrence, even if she does not oppose the bill. The circumstances of the case did not meet the high threshold of exceptionality, as there was no evidence of egregious or outrageous failure by the Crown in 1992, nor any systemic or operational deficiency amounting to a breach of the complainer's ECHR rights. The mere possibility of an error in judgment or a change in evidential assessment over time was insufficient. Accordingly, the bill for criminal letters was refused.

Citation
[2024] HCJAC 40
Parties
Complainer: A. B.; Respondent: Paul Cooney; For the Crown: The Lord Advocate (Bain KC), Gill KC AD, MacNeill AD; Crown Agent
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Bill for Criminal Letters (application for Private Prosecution) / Application for Authority to Bring Private Prosecution After Crown Renunciation and Refusal of Concurrence
Outcome
Bill for criminal letters refused.
Legal Topics
Private Prosecution, Renunciation of Prosecution, Exceptional Circumstances, ECHR Article 3 and 8 Rights, Sufficiency of Evidence, Role of Lord Advocate
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Private Prosecution Renunciation of Prosecution Exceptional Circumstances ECHR Article 3 and 8 Rights Sufficiency of Evidence Role of Lord Advocate

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. B.

Complainer

Paul Cooney

Respondent

The Lord Advocate (Bain KC), Gill KC AD, MacNeill AD; Crown Agent

For the Crown

Procedural Posture

Bill for Criminal Letters (application for Private Prosecution) / Application for Authority to Bring Private Prosecution After Crown Renunciation and Refusal of Concurrence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify granting a bill for criminal letters where the Lord Advocate has renounced prosecution and refused concurrence
  2. 2 Whether refusal to grant the bill would breach the complainer's rights under Articles 3 and 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the requirement for exceptional circumstances remains where the Lord Advocate has refused concurrence, even if she does not oppose the bill. The circumstances of the case did not meet the high threshold of exceptionality, as there was no evidence of egregious or outrageous failure by the Crown in 1992, nor any systemic or operational deficiency amounting to a breach of the complainer's ECHR rights. The mere possibility of an error in judgment or a change in evidential assessment over time was insufficient. Accordingly, the bill for criminal letters was refused.

Court Disposition

Bill for criminal letters refused.

Orders

  • Application for authority to bring private prosecution refused.