DC, RECLAIMING MOTION AGAINST (1) DG AND (2) DR [2017] ScotCS CSIH_72 (28 November 2017)

DC, RECLAIMING MOTION AGAINST (1) DG AND (2) DR [2017] ScotCS CSIH_72 (28 November 2017)

The Lord Ordinary's findings on the respondent's severe intoxication, incapacity to consent, and the reclaimers' lack of reasonable belief in consent were supported by the evidence. The appellate court found no error in the treatment of Clifford Wilson's evidence or the assessment of CCTV footage. The Lord Ordinary's conclusions were reasonable and justified on the evidence.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSIH_72
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: DC; First Defender and Reclaimer: DG; Second Defender and Reclaimer: DR
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Reclaiming Motion (appeal)
Outcome
reclaiming motion refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Rape, Consent, Evidence Assessment, Appellate Review
Civil Law Delict Sexual Offences Sexual Assault Rape Consent Evidence Assessment Appellate Review

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DC

Pursuer and Respondent

DG

First Defender and Reclaimer

DR

Second Defender and Reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Civil / Reclaiming Motion (appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Lord Ordinary erred in his treatment of the witness Clifford Wilson's evidence
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Ordinary gave adequate weight to CCTV evidence regarding the respondent's intoxication and the reclaimers' belief in consent
  3. 3 Whether the Lord Ordinary failed to differentiate between the reclaimers regarding their knowledge of the respondent's condition

Ratio Decidendi

The Lord Ordinary's findings on the respondent's severe intoxication, incapacity to consent, and the reclaimers' lack of reasonable belief in consent were supported by the evidence. The appellate court found no error in the treatment of Clifford Wilson's evidence or the assessment of CCTV footage. The Lord Ordinary's conclusions were reasonable and justified on the evidence.

Court Disposition

reclaiming motion refused

Orders

  • The reclaiming motion is refused.
  • The interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary is adhered to.