Noble v. Chief Constable Northern Constabulary [2011] ScotSC 20 (21 April 2011)

Noble v. Chief Constable Northern Constabulary [2011] ScotSC 20 (21 April 2011)

The pursuer was found to be of intemperate habits and unfit to be entrusted with a firearm, and could not be permitted to have a firearm or shotgun without danger to public safety or peace. The court preferred the evidence of the police officers and the Chief Constable over that of the pursuer and his witnesses. The weapons were found stored insecurely, the pursuer had a history of intemperate and malicious conduct, and his explanations were not credible. The statutory tests for revocation under s.30A and s.30C were met. The appeal was refused and the summary application dismissed.

Citation
[2011] ScotSC 20
Parties
Pursuer: Nigel Allan Noble; Defender: Ian Latimer, Chief Constable, Northern Constabulary
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Summary Application (appeal Against Revocation of Firearms and Shotgun Certificates) / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Appeal refused. Summary application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Revocation of Firearms Certificate, Revocation of Shotgun Certificate, Appeal on Merits, Public Safety and Peace, Intemperate Habits, Fit and Proper Person, Burden of Proof in Firearms Appeals
Firearms Law Administrative Law Public Safety Revocation of Firearms Certificate Revocation of Shotgun Certificate Appeal on Merits Public Safety and Peace Intemperate Habits +2 more

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Allan Noble

Pursuer

Ian Latimer, Chief Constable, Northern Constabulary

Defender

Procedural Posture

Summary Application (appeal Against Revocation of Firearms and Shotgun Certificates) / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer is of intemperate habits and unfit to be entrusted with a firearm under s.30A(2)(a) Firearms Act 1968
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer can be permitted to have a firearm or shotgun without danger to public safety or peace under s.30A(2)(b) and s.30C(1) Firearms Act 1968
  3. 3 Whether the revocation of the pursuer's firearms and shotgun certificates was justified on the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer was found to be of intemperate habits and unfit to be entrusted with a firearm, and could not be permitted to have a firearm or shotgun without danger to public safety or peace. The court preferred the evidence of the police officers and the Chief Constable over that of the pursuer and his witnesses. The weapons were found stored insecurely, the pursuer had a history of intemperate and malicious conduct, and his explanations were not credible. The statutory tests for revocation under s.30A and s.30C were met. The appeal was refused and the summary application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused. Summary application dismissed.

Orders

  • Sustains the defender's third and fourth pleas in law.
  • Repels the defender's first and second pleas in law as unnecessary.