RM & Anor, Re Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission [2012] ScotHC HCJAC_121 (25 April 2012)

RM & Anor, Re Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission [2012] ScotHC HCJAC_121 (25 April 2012)

The SCCRC references should not be rejected unless the Commission has demonstrably failed in its statutory task. The interests of justice test is satisfied in both cases, and there is no flaw in the Commission's approach.

Citation
[2012] ScotHC HCJAC_121
Parties
Appellant: RM; Appellant: Edward William Gallacher; Referrer: Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
25 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Preliminary Hearing on Rejection of SCCRC Reference
Outcome
References allowed to proceed; no rejection under section 194DA.
Legal Topics
Miscarriage of Justice, Finality and Certainty, Right to Legal Advice, Gate Keeping Function of Appeal Court, Cadder Principle
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Miscarriage of Justice Finality and Certainty Right to Legal Advice Gate Keeping Function of Appeal Court Cadder Principle

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RM

Appellant

Edward William Gallacher

Appellant

Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission

Referrer

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Preliminary Hearing on Rejection of SCCRC Reference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the SCCRC references be rejected under section 194DA of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995?
  2. 2 Is it in the interests of justice to allow appeals based on Cadder v HM Advocate?
  3. 3 What weight should be given to finality and certainty in criminal proceedings?

Ratio Decidendi

The SCCRC references should not be rejected unless the Commission has demonstrably failed in its statutory task. The interests of justice test is satisfied in both cases, and there is no flaw in the Commission's approach.

Court Disposition

References allowed to proceed; no rejection under section 194DA.

Orders

  • Reference in RM's case allowed to proceed; leave to argue additional grounds to be decided later.
  • Reference in Edward Gallacher's case allowed to proceed.