Inner House case considering a planning appeal in respect of a proposed development of 12 flats by Greenland Developments on land to the south of Veitch’s Square, Stockbridge in Edinburgh. Despite being recommended for approval by the planning officer, the application was refused as the development was deemed to be contrary to the Local Plan in various respects. Greenland appealed to the Scottish Ministers. Following an unaccompanied site inspection and consideration of t ...
|
0 0 1 340 1939 Faculty of Advocates 16 4 2275 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria;} Criminal Appeal under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995:- The appellant was charged on a summary complaint in the Justice of the Peace Court in Stonehaven of driving a motor vehicle at a speed in excess o ...
|
0 0 1 463 2641 Faculty of Advocates 22 6 3098 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria;} Reference by The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission:- On 9 February 2004 at the High Court at Glasgow the appellant was convicted after trial, by a majority verdict, of a charge of murder. The appellant was sen ...
|
0 0 1 776 4424 Faculty of Advocates 36 10 5190 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-GB JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-style-parent:""; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria;} Criminal Note of Appeal Against Sentence:- On 31 May 2011, at Oban Sheriff Court, the appellants pled guilty, by way of accelerated indictment procedure under Section 76 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, ...
|
A single judge sitting in the High Court did have jurisdiction to make a committal order for an alleged contempt of court in proceedings commenced in the county court but subsequently transferred to the High Court.The appellant, who had been the original Claimant appealed against a decision that a single judge sitting in the High Court had jurisdiction to hear an application by the respondent Insurer for his committal for alleged contempt of court. The Insurer had filed and served a Defence alle ...
|
The trial judge had not erred in implicitly accepting a witness' evidence as truthful despite not clearly expressing his reasoning and consequent findings.A local authority appealed against a decision that it had breached its duty of care owed to the Claimant when she had fallen crossing a grass verge outside her house due an averred hole in the car. During the trial the judge considered a number of photographs of the verge taken at least 3 years after the accident which the Claimant suggested w ...
|
A judge's award of costs based on a Claimant's Part 36 offer was illegitimate as the offer had been withdrawn the Court could rely on the consequences of a previous unwithdrawn Part 36 offer.It was agreed between the parties that the judge's award of costs based on the second Part 36 offer was technically illegitimate as that offer had been withdrawn. The question was whether the award could or properly should be translated into Part 36 costs consequences under the surviving first offer or under ...
|
Low value RTA claim settled under the terms of a Part 36 offer, the costs were to be assessed under CPR 45 Part II rather than on the standard basis.The appellants, who had been claimants in low-value road traffic accident claims, appealed against decisions to award costs in accordance with Part 45 Part II rather than on the standard basis. In both cases, the Claimants had accepted Part 36 offers of sums totalling less than £10,000 made by the Defendants before the claims had been issued. The Co ...
|
This case concerned whether a sub-contract allowed the main contractor (Mulalley) to claim from the sub-contractor (Leander) if the sub-contractor's actions interfered with the progress of the main contract works. Mulalley issued withholding notices for delays by Leander, which Leander challenged in these proceedings. Leander argued that the sub-contract did not contain an express obligation to proceed diligently, and there was no implied term to this effect. Mulalley argued there was such an im ...
|
The Court of Appeal considered conjoined appeals and a cross-appeal arising out of two decisions of the TCC which (i) affirmed the jurisdiction of an adjudicator in spite of the fact that the adjudicator was the second appointed adjudicator, but then (ii) held that the second adjudicator's decision was a nullity for apparent bias. In respect of the jurisdiction of the second adjudicator, Jackson LJ, giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal, found that a party who did not pursue an adjudication ...
|
| 1 |