Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Scotland decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Appeal under the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 refused. The court held the sheriff applied the correct test, and further time would have made no difference.
Pentland-Clark v Wilson & Ors [2013] ScotCS CSIH_48 (04 June 2013)
The Inner House refused a motion to sist a debt-and-expenses action pending an ECtHR application, holding that the case was effectively concluded except for expenses.
Procurator Fiscal Paisley v AK & Anor [2012] ScotHC HCJAC_44 (03 April 2012)
The Appeal Court held that the Crown could competently bring bills of advocation despite a statutory appeal route, and rejected Article 6 and acquiescence objections.
REPUBLIC OF POLAND v. DARIUSZ MACHON prisoner in the prison of HM PRISON, SAUGHTON, EDINBURGH [2010] ScotSC 119 (09 July 2010)
The sheriff ordered extradition to Poland under a European Arrest Warrant, rejecting claims that Polish prison conditions created a real risk of Article 3 ill-treatment.
McAllisters & Ors v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2009] ScotHC HCJAC_107 (11 December 2009)
The Appeal Court held that refusal of junior counsel did not make a fair trial impossible and refused the appellants’ Article 6-based appeals.
Thomson v. Burns [2009] ScotHC HCJAC_45 (07 May 2009)
The Appeal Court held that the Crown had disclosed all material in its possession and that there was no basis to desert a summary drink-driving case simpliciter.
McInnes v. Her Majesty's Advocate [2008] ScotHC HCJAC_53 (26 September 2008)
The Appeal Court held that non-disclosure of a witness’s police statement did not deny a fair trial, because it caused no real prejudice and no miscarriage of justice.
Richardson & Ors v Rivers [2004] ScotSC 55 (23 August 2004)
Appeal allowed on expenses after abandonment of an action, where the sheriff was held to have proceeded unfairly on an unprepared oral motion.
PROCURATOR FISACL, FORT WILLIAM v. NORMAN McLEAN and PETER McLEAN [2000] ScotHC 58 (4th May, 2000)
The fixed payment regime under the 1999 Regulations does not, in itself, constitute a breach of Article 6 ECHR rights to a fair trial or effective legal assistance. There is no evidence of actual or substantial risk of prejudice to the respondents' defence, and professional obligations ensure effective representation. Mere appearance or theoretical conflict of interest is insufficient to sustain a plea in bar of trial. The Sheriff's decision to uphold the plea and dismiss the complaint was erroneous and is reversed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
