Graham, Chief Constable Fife Constabulary, Re Judicial Review [2010] ScotCS CSOH_166 (15 December 2010)
The Tribunal erred in law by allowing the new ground of appeal, which had already been considered and rejected as lacking merit in prior proceedings. No reasonable Tribunal would have allowed the new ground given the absence of prejudice and the lack of a stateable point of law.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] ScotCS CSOH_166
- Parties
- Petitioner: Norma Graham, Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary; Respondent: William Crawford
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- decision reduced
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review, Police Appeals Tribunal, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Proof, Amendment of Grounds of Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Norma Graham, Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary
Petitioner
William Crawford
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Police Appeals Tribunal erred in law or acted unreasonably in allowing an additional ground of appeal and permitting new evidence.
- 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider material factors such as delay, prejudice, and merit of the new ground.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal erred in law by allowing the new ground of appeal, which had already been considered and rejected as lacking merit in prior proceedings. No reasonable Tribunal would have allowed the new ground given the absence of prejudice and the lack of a stateable point of law.
Court Disposition
decision reduced
Orders
- The Tribunal's decision intimated on 26 March 2010 is reduced.
- Case to be put out by order for further procedural steps and expenses.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment