Category: Scotland

Hill v HM Advocate: HCJ 30 Oct 2014

The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of a blade in a public place. He argued that he had a reasonable excuse. He was driving a friend’s car and said he had no knowledge of what was in the boot and elsewhere.
Held: The offence under section 49 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 is committed where a person ‘has’ ‘with him’ a bladed article. It is clear from Crowe v Waugh 1999 JC 292 that the approach taken in Scotland is that Parliament deliberately intended not to include such factors as knowledge and intent in the section and that therefore these matters are irrelevant to the initial question of whether someone has an item with him. However, it is correct to say that a person can have an item with him without knowing of the item’s existence, at least if he ought to have been aware of it. Nevertheless, where lack of knowledge is proffered as an excuse by an accused person in evidence, as in this case, it is almost inevitable that an appropriate direction should be given to the effect that such an excuse may be found to exist by the jury. It follows, therefore, that this appeal must be allowed and the conviction quashed.

Lord Carloway
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 117
Bailii
Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539868

The Scottish Ministers v Stirton and Another: SCS 7 Nov 2014

These proceedings concern the civil recovery of the proceeds of unlawful conduct, notably money laundering, extortion and mortgage fraud, in terms of section 266 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The reclaimer contended that the crown had not had sufficient evidence tat one of the properties charged had been the fruit of unlawful conduct.
Held: Only one standard of proof applies, , that being the balance of probabilities.

Garloway Lord Justice Clerk
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 92
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
Scotland
Citing:
See Also – Scottish Ministers v Stirton and Another SCS 5-Feb-2008
Application for an interim administration order in terms of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and for warrant for inhibition and arrestment . .
See Also – Scottish Ministers v Stirton and Another SCS 30-Apr-2009
. .
See Also – The Scottish Ministers v Stirton SCS 24-Jan-2012
. .
See Also – Scottish Ministers, Re Stirton and Another SCS 17-Oct-2012
. .
Cited – The Scottish Ministers v Stirton and Another SCS 11-Oct-2013
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Sadovska and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 26-Jul-2017
The parties had applied to be married. S was a European citizen, and the intended groom was an overstayer from Pakistan. They were refused a licence, and taken into custody, and now appealed against refusal of a licence.
Held: The appeal . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.539154

AR, Re An Order Under The Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985: SCS 14 Nov 2014

(Extra Division, Inner House – Opinion of Lord Malcolm) – appeal in application for order of return of two children to their father in France. The partis disputed whether Scotland had become habitually resident in Scotland, and also whether the father had consented to their removal to Scotland.
Held: The Lord ordinary granted the appeal against the order in favour of the father. The Lord Ordinary had erred in law in treating a shared parental intention to move permanently to Scotland as an essential element in any alteration of the children’s habitual residence from France to Scotland. This error had deflected him from a proper consideration of the factors relied upon by the mother. Considering the matter afresh, in the light of the guidance provided by the Supreme Court, the Division now concluded that the children were habitually resident in Scotland at the material time: ‘If the salient facts of the present case are approached in accordance with the guidance summarised earlier, the key finding of the Lord Ordinary is that the children came to live in Scotland. The real issue is whether there was a need for a longer period in Scotland before it could be held that there had been a change in their habitual residence. For our part, in the whole circumstances we would view four months as sufficient.’

Lady Paton, Lord Drummond Young, Lord Malcolm
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 95, 2015 SCLR 215, 2015 SC 310, 2014 SLT 1080, 2014 GWD 37-686, [2014] Fam LR 131
Bailii
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
Citing:
Appeal from – In Re AR (An Order Under The Child Abduction And Custody Act 1985) SCS 17-Jun-2014
The two girls were with their mother in Scotland. The father, living in France, sought their return to France:
Held: The court granted the father’s application. The Lord Ordinary: ‘After considering all the relevant evidence I am satisfied . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – AR v RN (Scotland) SC 22-May-2015
The court was asked whether it should order the return to France of two little girls who have been living with their mother in Scotland since July 2013. The issue arose under article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Children

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.539141

Organisation S and Transport Scotland: SIC 4 Nov 2015

SIC Business displacement and Sustaining Dunbar – On 19 August 2014, Organisation S asked Transport Scotland for information it held about Cycling Scotland relating to business displacement and the community development trust, Sustaining Dunbar.
Transport Scotland disclosed some information and stated that it did not hold any further information.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner found that Transport Scotland partially failed to respond to Organisation S’ request for information in accordance with the EIRs. The Commissioner accepts that Transport Scotland did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request, but finds that it failed to respond to the request within the statutory time limit.

[2015] ScotIC 167 – 2015
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.556113

T Clarke (Scotland) Ltd v Mmaxx Underfloor Heating Ltd: SCS 15 Oct 2014

A reclaiming motion by the pursuer against an interlocutor by which the Lord Ordinary refused to grant interim interdict against the respondent and defender from referring for adjudication any disputes arising from a contract between the pursuer and the defender.

Lord Eassie, Lord Bracadale, Lord Drummond Young
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 83
Bailii

Scotland, Contract

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538177

In The Petition of Tesco Stores Ltd for Judicial Review of A Decision of Perth and Kinross Council Dated 13 November 2013: SCS 23 Oct 2014

Outer House, Court of Session – petition for judicial review concerns a decision by the Perth and Kinross Council the relevant planning authority, to agree to the removal of a condition in an agreement between itself and Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited.

Lord Glennie
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 153
Bailii

Scotland, Planning

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538169

Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v O’Donnell and Mcdonald: SCS 16 Oct 2014

Extra Division Inner House Court of Session. The reclaimers have brought proceedings against the respondents to enforce a guarantee that the respondents had purportedly granted in support of the borrowings of a company controlled by them. The respondents have counterclaimed for reduction of the guarantee on the ground that it was induced by misrepresentations made by the reclaimers.

Lord Bracadale, Lord Drummond Young, Lord Wheatley
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 84
Bailii

Scotland, Banking, Torts – Other

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538175

Edwin Lawrence v South Ayrshire Council: SIC 8 Aug 2014

SIC Breakdown of costs – On 9 January 2014, Mr Lawrence asked South Ayrshire Council (the Council) for a breakdown of the costs of a building project at New Bridge Street, Ayr. The Council provided some information to Mr Lawrence, but withheld other information on the basis that disclosure would substantially prejudice the contractor’s commercial interests.
During the investigation, the Council informed the Commissioner that it did not in fact hold a further breakdown of the costs. The Commissioner accepted that this was the case, but found that the Council had failed to give Mr Lawrence proper notice of this.

[2014] ScotIC 175 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538071

Mclean and Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body: SIC 7 Oct 2014

On 6 January 2014, Mr McLean asked the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (the SPCB) for information relating to a minute of the Scottish Parliament’s Local Government and Regeneration Committee (LGandRC).
Where the SPCB considered Mr Mclean’s email to contain valid information requests, it responded
by stating that it did not hold the information requested. Following a review, Mr McLean remained dissatisfied and applied to the Commissioner for a decision.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the SPCB had properly responded to Mr McLean’s requests for information in accordance with Part 1 of FOISA.

[2014] ScotIC 214 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538109

Unison Glasgow City Branch v Glasgow City Council: SIC 8 Oct 2014

On 9 April 2014, UNISON Glasgow City Branch (Unison) asked Glasgow City Council (the Council) for the legal Opinion provided by Richard Keen QC to the Council concerning the Council’s powerto implement the recommendations outlined in its Executive Committee report of 17 April 2014.
The Council responded by advising Unison that it considered the requested information to be exempt from disclosure in terms of section 36(1) of FOISA (Confidentiality). Following a review, Unison remained dissatisfied and applied to the Commissioner for a decision.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the Council was correct to withhold the information.
She did not require the Council to take any action.

[2014] ScotIC 218 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538115

Tom Gordon v Scottish Ministers (No 2): SIC 21 Jul 2014

SIC Modelling exercise in relation to childcare and female labour market participation – On 21 January 2014, Mr Gordon asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for the results of a modelling exercise referred to in a Scottish Government paper on childcare and female labour market participation. The Ministers withheld the information under section 29(1)(a) of FOISA on the basis that it related to the formulation or development of government policy.
The Commissioner found that the Ministers were entitled to withhold the information under this exemption.

[2014] ScotIC 161 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538061

Bob Doris MSP v Glasgow City Council: SIC 8 Aug 2014

SIC Correspondence concerning the closure of day centres for adults with learning disabilities – On 20 February 2013, Mr Doris asked Glasgow City Council (the Council) for correspondence between Councillors and Council Officers relating to the proposal to close three day centres for adults with learning disabilities. The Council withheld the information on the basis that it was exempt from disclosure in terms of section 30(b)(ii) of FOISA.
During the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council disclosed some information to Mr Doris. The Council also told Mr Doris that it held some of the information on behalf of Councillors and this meant that it did not hold the information for the purposes of FOISA and so did not have to disclose it.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner accepted that some of the information was held by the Council on behalf of Councillors, and not for the purposes of FOISA. However, the Commissioner also found that some of the information was held by the Council in its own right, and so the Council did hold this information for the purposes of FOISA. The Commissioner accepted that the Council was entitled to withhold some of this information under the exemption in section 30(b)(ii) of FOISA but did not accept that the remainder was exempt from disclosure. She required the Council to disclose it to Mr Doris.
The Commissioner was satisfied that the Council had identified all of the relevant information that it held which fell within the scope of Mr Doris’s request.

[2014] ScotIC 174 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538069

Picken v Scottish Ministers: SIC 20 Aug 2014

Expenditure on travel and subsistence cards – On 13 April 2013, Mr Andrew Picken asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for expenditure on travel and subsistence cards by Scottish Government ministers, excluding the First Minister, since 2007. The Ministers did not respond to this request. Following a review, the Ministers disclosed some information but withheld the names of the accommodation in which Ministers had stayed. Mr Picken remained dissatisfied and applied to the Commissioner for a decision.
Following an investigation, during which the Ministers disclosed more information, the Commissioner required the Ministers to disclose the withheld information (the names of hotels) to Mr Picken.

[2014] ScotIC 182 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538067

Tom Gordon and Scottish Ministers: SIC 21 Jul 2014

Modelling relating to proposals for childcare – On 21 January 2014, Mr Gordon asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for the full results of any modelling done on the childcare proposals on page 194 of the White Paper, Scotland’s Future.
The Ministers withheld the information under section 29(1)(a) of FOISA on the basis that it related to the formulation or development of government policy.
The Commissioner found that the Ministers were entitled to withhold the information under this exemption.

[2014] ScotIC 160 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538060

Pybus and Scottish Environment Protection Agency: SIC 28 Jul 2014

On 25 July 2013, Mr Pybus asked the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) for a Field Development Plan (FDP) Addendum report for unconventional gas development. The majority of the information was withheld on the basis that regulation 10(5)(e) of the EIRs applied, and the remainder was disclosed.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner agreed with SEPA that the information that had been withheld in the FDP Addendum report was excepted from disclosure under regulation 10(5)(e), which relates to the confidentiality of commercial or industrial information.

[2014] ScotIC 167 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.538056

HM Advocate v McAllister: HCJ 7 Oct 2014

The defendant had been convicted of an offence of supplying drugs whilst on licence for a similar offence. The court considered a request for an order under the 2002 Act.

Lord Boyd of Duncansby
[2014] ScotHC HCJ – 112
Bailii
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 76, Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 4(3)(b), Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 92
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537446

Robson v HM Advocate: HCJ 6 Oct 2014

Application for leave to appeal to Supreme Court – refused – Holland had been followed

Lady Paton, Lady Smith, Lord Drummond Young
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 109
Bailii
Citing:
Applied – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Devolution) PC 11-May-2005
The defendant appealed his convictions for robbery. He had been subject to a dock identification, and he complained that the prosecution had failed in its duties of disclosure.
Held: The combination of several failings meant that the defendant . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.537447

Lord Advocate v Babcock and Wilcox (Operations) Ltd: HL 15 Mar 1972

Construction of selective employment tax

Lord Reid,
Lord Morris of Borth-Y-Gest,
Lord Diplock,
Lord Simon of Glaisdale,
And,
Lord Kilbrandon
[1972] UKHL 8, [1972] 1 WLR 488, [1972] 1 All ER 1130, [1972] SLT 103, [1972] SC (HL) 1, (1972) 12 KIR 329
Bailii
Finance Act 1966 44
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – MSF v Refuge Assurance Plc, United Friendly Insurance EAT 15-Feb-2002
EAT The EAT considered the employer’s duties to consult on making redundancies. The ET had found that company had satisfied the requirements. The Union argued that the duty to consult arose as soon as . .
Cited – MSF v Refuge Assurance Plc, United Friendly Insurance EAT 15-Feb-2002
EAT The EAT considered the employer’s duties to consult on making redundancies. The ET had found that company had satisfied the requirements. The Union argued that the duty to consult arose as soon as . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Taxes – Other

Updated: 22 December 2021; Ref: scu.279734

May and Butcher Limited v The King: HL 1929

(Note) Old tentage had been sold at such prices as ‘shall be agreed from time to time’ and at such delivery periods as should be similarly agreed.
Held: There was a mere agreement to agree and no contract had ever come into existence.
Lord Dunedin said: ‘No doubt as to goods, the Sale of Goods Act, 1893, says that if the price is not mentioned and settled in the contract it is to be a reasonable price. The simple answer in this case is that the Sale of Goods Act provides for silence on the point and here there is no silence, because there is a provision that the two parties are to agree.’
Lord Buckmaster spoke of the ‘well recognized principle of contract law that an agreement between two parties to enter into an agreement in which some critical part of the contract matter is left undetermined is no contract at all’, or ‘the principle that you cannot agree to agree.’

Lord Dunedin, Lord Warrington of Clyffe, Lord Buckmaster
[1934] 2 KB 17, [1929] UKHL 2, [1929] All ER Rep 679
Bailii
Sale of Goods Act 1893
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Leeds Rugby Ltd v Harris and Bradford Bulls Holdings Limited QBD 20-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages from the defendants saying that the second defendant had induced a breach of contract by the first when he left to play rugby for the second defendant.
Held: The contract could not be said to be void as an agreement . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.229006

Lormor Ltd v Glasgow City Council: SCS 26 Sep 2014

Extra Division – Inner House – Opinion – the Court was asked – whether, in order to prevent tacit relocation, the tenant of lands exceeding two acres in extent which are let from year to year (including lands occupied by tacit relocation) requires to give not less than 6 months’ notice of termination, or whether not less than forty days’ notice will suffice for that purpose.

Lord Menzies
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 80
Bailii

Scotland, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537046

LWF (Ap) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SCS 24 Sep 2014

Extra Division – Inner House – the respondent referred to a letter dated 20 December 2012 from the petitioner’s solicitors. In that letter, the solicitors contended that to require the petitioner to leave the United Kingdom, and thus be forced to apply for entry clearance from abroad, would breach her family and private life rights under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and also the article 8 rights of her partner, a UK citizen named LJA.

lady Paton
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 77
Bailii
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 94(2), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Scotland, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537045

Frank Houlgate Investment Company Ltd v Biggart Baillie Llp: SCS 25 Sep 2014

Extra Division – Inner House – The pursuer alleged that solicitors had failed to identify that a fraudster borrowing money from him was not the same as the owne of the land to be taken in charge by security. In particular the court was asked: ‘ whether the defenders are liable to make reparation to the pursuers because Mr Mair knew that JMC had deceived the pursuers and granted a security in their favour over property in which he had no interest, yet continued to act on behalf of JMC, took no steps to inform the pursuers or their agents of JMC’s admitted fraud, and did nothing to prevent JMC obtaining further funds from the pursuers.’

Lord Menzies
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 79
Bailii

Scotland, Professional Negligence, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537043

Peat and Kerr Executors Over The Estate of The Late Margaret Gilfillan Colquhoun Peat v Assembly Theatre Ltd: SCS 25 Sep 2014

Outer House – ‘The pursuers aver that the deceased sustained personal injuries when she fell at the defenders’ premises in George Street, Edinburgh on the evening of 6 August 2010; and that the accident was caused through the defenders’ fault.’

Lord Doherty
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 144
Bailii

Scotland, Personal Injury

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537042

Ferguson v M’Culloch: SCS 22 Nov 1865

Court of Session Inner House Second Division – The grandfather and father of Hugh Ferguson have, and Hugh Ferguson, the heir of the latter, has, since his father’s death, possessed a certain portion of ground, the possession extending for upwards of seventy years, on which houses were built and erections made. The ground was part of the estate of Bonhill, which belonged to the ancestors of Mr Smollett, and now belongs to himself. The plots of ground in the neighbourhood were let by Mr Smollett’s ancestor on building leases for 99 years, and in the lease of an adjoining plot, that on which the present claim is founded is described as a lot of ground set to John Ferguson. A plan of the village of Alexandria, containing an entry in name of John Ferguson, a series of receipts for rent, and a formal lease dated, however, on the day that the Registration Court was held, constituted the written title of the appellant. The question in law was whether this was a sufficient one either under the 7th or 9th sections of 2d and 3d Will IV. c. 65.

[1865] SLR 1 – 49
Bailii
Scotland

Land

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.575129

Anderson As Executor Nominate of The Late Patricia Anderson: SCS 26 Aug 2014

Inner House, Extra Division – The petitioner alleged that damage had been caused to his late mother’s property by water running off neighbouring land for which he held the Council responsible. He now sought suspension of a charge imposed as to the costs of earlier hearings and not paid.
Held: the request failed.

Lord Brodie
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 73
Bailii

Scotland

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536362

A J Allan (Blairnyle) Ltd and Another v Strathclyde Fire Board: SCS 2 Sep 2014

Outer House – The pursuers seek damages in respect of loss caused by fire in a farmhouse and outbuildings owned by them. The damage occasioned by the fire is averred to have been caused as a result of fault and negligence of the defenders who are a joint fire and rescue board responsible, inter alia, for the provision of fire services in Strathclyde region. The parties now disputed the relevance of the proceedings.

Lord Brailsford
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 135
Bailii

Scotland, Negligence

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536364

Jean Mcgovern v The Scottish Ministers for Suspension and Interdict: SCS 28 Aug 2014

Outer House – The petitioner sought suspension of a decree for removal, dated and extracted respectively on 7 and 21 May 2014, and interdict against the respondents prohibiting them from evicting the petitioner and her daughter from 167 Foresthall Drive, Glasgow. The petitioner sought interim orders on the basis that she was due to be evicted on 22 July 2014.
Held: refused

Lord Carloway, Lord Justice Clerk
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 134
Bailii

Scotland, Housing

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536360

McCue for Reduction of Certain Decisions of Glasgow City Council: SCS 8 Aug 2014

Outer House – (i) In this application, the petitioner sought judicial review of a number of decisions made by the respondent in exercise of obligations imposed on it by the terms of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. At a preliminary hearing, the respondent argued that the petition should be dismissed on the grounds that (i) it raises no live issue and (ii) an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner and has not been pursued.
(ii) I dismissed the petition as incompetent because there is available to the petitioner an alternative remedy which she has not pursued.

LordJones
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 124
Bailii
Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968
Scotland

Health Professions

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535834

Kerr v Mangan and Others: SCS 25 Jul 2014

The deceased’s former partner of many years claimed after his death for money from his estate. The court agreed, but decided that a house in in Ireland belong to the deceased had not been part of the estate, being out of the jurisdiction, and that therefore the ‘net intestate estate’ could not support a payment.

Lady Smith, Lord Drummond Young, Lord McGhie
[2014] ScotCS CSIH – 69
Bailii

Scotland, Wills and Probate

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535589

Trustees of The Scottish Solicitors Staff Pension Fund v Pattison and Sim and Others: SCS 1 Aug 2014

Action for payment, the trustees of the Scottish Solicitors Staff Pension Fund seek to recover andpound;50,224 from the firm of Pattison and Sim and its two partners. The trustees maintain that the original trust documents have been amended several times, and that rules adopted in 1990 now govern the Fund. The defenders deny liability. They question whether the formal amendment procedure set out in the original trust documents was followed. They contend that the trustees do not offer to prove that the various amending deeds are valid. Accordingly, the action is so fundamentally lacking in specification that it is irrelevant and should be dismissed.

Lord Woolman
[2014] ScotCS CSOH – 119
Bailii

Scotland

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535593

Katherine Stevenson, and Mr James Gillon, Advocate, Her Husband v Gilbert, Mary, and Eupham Fife, Children of Gilbert Fife Deceased, Late One of The Baillies of Edinburgh: HL 20 Feb 1719

Heritable and moveable – A bond taken to a man and his wife in life-rent, and to their daughter in fee, and failing her by decease to the husband, his heirs, executors, or assignees; found to be moveable, that being but one substitution.
Tutor and Pupil – A tutor having taken a heritable bond, in corroboration of a personal one payable to the pupil and her issue, whom failing to three aunts, her nearest in kin nominatim; it is found that he acted warrantably.
Succession – The three aunts having neither confirmed nor served themselves heirs, but one or them, who survived, being according to the tenor of the said heritable bond entitled thereto, assigned the same; in a question between the assignees and the heir, who was then also nearest in kin or the deceased pupil, the assignation is supported.

[1719] UKHL Robertson – 216, (1719) Robertson 216
Bailii
Scotland

Contract

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.553530

Bills of Advocate By Harun Akhtar and Nothers: HCJ 23 Jul 2014

The appellants, in separate bills of advocation, made complaint against decisions of the Sheriff at Perth, whereby the said sheriff, when the indictment called for trial in the sitting to which it had been appointed, ex proprio motu adjourned the trial diet, and thereafter granted a motion by the procurator fiscal depute for an extension of time in terms of section 65(3) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.

Lord Eassie, Lord Menzies, Lady Clark of Calton
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 80
Bailii
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 65(3)

Scotland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535260

Ryan and West Lothian Council: SIC 15 Jul 2014

Inspection and repair records – On 2 October 2013, Morisons Solicitors, on behalf of their client Mr Ryan, asked West Lothian Council (the Council) for information regarding the inspection and repair of a specific footpath. The Council responded by providing some information to Mr Ryan, while stating that it did not hold further information. During the investigation, the Council notified the Commissioner that it held additional information and that it had now been provided to Mr Ryan. While the Council failed to comply with the EIRs in not providing this information earlier, the Commissioner was satisfied by the end of the investigation that all relevant information had been provided to Mr Ryan.

[2014] ScotIC 154 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535268

Banknock Haggs and Longcroft Community Council and Transport Scotland: SIC 16 Jul 2014

Land transaction – On 10 October 2013, Banknock Haggs and Longcroft Community Council (BHLCC) asked Transport Scotland for information about a land transaction. Transport Scotland refused to make the information available and informed BHLCC that the request was manifestly unreasonable. BHLCC did not accept this and so applied to the Commissioner for a decision.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner accepted that the request was manifestly unreasonable and that, as a result, Transport Scotland was entitled to refuse to make the information available to BHLCC.

[2014] ScotIC 157 – 2014
Bailii

Scotland, Information

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535266

Dr J Wallace Hinton and Scottish Public Services Ombudsman: SIC 17 Jul 2014

SIC Complaint investigation – On 8 October 2013, Dr Hinton asked the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (the SPSO) for information sent to and received from Glasgow City Council during a complaint investigation. The SPSO withheld the information under section 26(a) of FOISA, on the basis that its disclosure was prohibited by other legislation.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner founds that the SPSO was entitled to withhold the requested information under section 26(a) of FOISA (on the basis of the statutory prohibition) and regulation 10(5)(d) of the EIRs (on grounds of confidentiality). She found that some of the information was environmental information and therefore should have been handled under the EIRs.

[2014] ScotIC 158 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535267