Lee v HM Advocate [2016] ScotHC HCJAC_39 (28 April 2016)

Lee v HM Advocate [2016] ScotHC HCJAC_39 (28 April 2016)

The court found that the appellant was proficient in English, had no material difficulty understanding the proceedings, and did not suffer prejudice due to the interpretation provided. Any misdirection by the trial judge was either a harmless slip or favoured the appellant, and no miscarriage of justice occurred. The appeal was refused.

Citation
[2016] ScotHC HCJAC_39
Parties
Appellant: San Lee; Respondent: Her Majesty’s Advocate
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Rape, Interpreter Standards, Fair Trial, Jury Directions, Sexual Offences (scotland) Act 2009

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

San Lee

Appellant

Her Majesty’s Advocate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a fair trial given alleged deficiencies in interpretation services at trial
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the issue of reasonable belief in consent

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant was proficient in English, had no material difficulty understanding the proceedings, and did not suffer prejudice due to the interpretation provided. Any misdirection by the trial judge was either a harmless slip or favoured the appellant, and no miscarriage of justice occurred. The appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused