The Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow against Rose Docherty (Sheriff Court Criminal) [2026] SCGLA 59 (29 April 2026)

The Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow against Rose Docherty (Sheriff Court Criminal) [2026] SCGLA 59 (29 April 2026)

The charges failed to specify two essential ingredients of the statutory offence under section 4(1)(a) of the 2024 Act: (i) the presence of another person in the safe access zone at the same time as the accused's act, and (ii) that such person was present for an abortion-related purpose. This omission rendered the charges irrelevant and insufficient to give fair notice. The prosecution on such charges was not 'prescribed by law' and unlawfully interfered with the accused's Article 10 ECHR right. The prosecutor's motion to amend was refused due to lack of evidential basis and continued deficiency in specification.

Citation
[2026] SCGLA 59
Parties
Prosecutor: The Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow; Accused: Rose Docherty
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Complaint / Preliminary Plea to Relevancy and Compatibility Issues; Debate and Ruling
Outcome
charges dismissed; proceedings deserted pro loco et tempore
Legal Topics
Safe Access Zones, Abortion Services, Freedom of Expression, Criminal Procedure, Statutory Offences, ECHR Article 10, Fair Notice in Criminal Charges
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Statutory Interpretation Safe Access Zones Abortion Services Freedom of Expression Criminal Procedure Statutory Offences +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 4 Authorities cited 29 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow

Prosecutor

Rose Docherty

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Complaint / Preliminary Plea to Relevancy and Compatibility Issues; Debate and Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charges as libelled specify all essential ingredients of the statutory offence under section 4(1)(a) of the Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Act 2024
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution on the basis of the charges constitutes an unlawful interference with the accused's Article 10 ECHR right to freedom of expression
  3. 3 Whether the prosecutor should be allowed to amend the complaint to cure alleged deficiencies

Ratio Decidendi

The charges failed to specify two essential ingredients of the statutory offence under section 4(1)(a) of the 2024 Act: (i) the presence of another person in the safe access zone at the same time as the accused's act, and (ii) that such person was present for an abortion-related purpose. This omission rendered the charges irrelevant and insufficient to give fair notice. The prosecution on such charges was not 'prescribed by law' and unlawfully interfered with the accused's Article 10 ECHR right. The prosecutor's motion to amend was refused due to lack of evidential basis and continued deficiency in specification.

Court Disposition

charges dismissed; proceedings deserted pro loco et tempore

Orders

  • Sustained accused's preliminary plea to relevancy
  • Sustained first compatibility issue in accused's compatibility minute