Top judge Lord Gill steps aside from case due to son’s involvement. SCOTLAND’S top judge, the Lord President Lord Brian Gill has been forced to stand aside from hearing an unidentified case in the Court of Session because “ a relative” - who turned out to be one of Lord Gill’s sons, represented a party involved in the court case.
The move by Lord Gill comes after a deal was reached with MSPs to publish reasons for judges standing aside in cases - reasons which have for the main, remained secret and unrecorded until the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee began an investigation into proposals to create a full register of judicial interests, as called for in Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary.
However, the first ever recoded recusal of the country’s top judge published by the Judiciary of Scotland in the new recusal list available here: Judicial Recusals, vaguely describes Lord Gill’s withdrawal from the case as due to a “Relative of Senator acts for the respondent” - whereas in fact it can now be revealed the “relative” turned out to be the Lord President’s son, Brian Gill QC.
At first, the Judicial Office refused to confirm the identity of Lord Gill’s “relative”.
A spokesperson for the Judicial Office stated: “We cannot provide any comment or further details in addition to what has already been published, but we can confirm that the advocate is one of the Lord President’s sons.”
The identity of Lord Gill’s son, Brian Gill QC - referred to as a “relative” in the official version was later confirmed by the Judicial Office but no details of the case being heard in Scotland’s top court which prompted the recusal were released.
Speaking to Diary of Injustice earlier today, a legal insider said: “Clearly it is of limited value to the public and court users if no one is able to find out the real reason the Lord President himself was forced to step aside from a case, and who exactly that person is and why it prompted a recusal.”
He continued: “When it comes to business links and family relationships of the judiciary impacting on litigation, it is clearly in the public interest the precise relationship of the judge to the individual, law firm, expert witness or otherwise and their identity should be published by the Judicial Office and made a matter of public record.”
In February 2014 the Lord President and Lord Justice General, Lord Gill gave an undertaking to make publicly available information about cases in which a judge or sheriff formally recuses him or herself from hearing a case. MPs were promised the fact of recusal and the reason for it will be published by the Judicial Office as notification of recusal is received.
However,it is noticeable from the current published list of judicial recusals there has not been one single recusal by a member of the judiciary on financial related grounds.
The lack of recusals by judges on financial related matters comes even though a considerable number of cases are in the Scottish courts where matters such as personal investments, creative finances & property ownership of members of the judiciary would certainly prompt cause for concerns if they were made public - some of which have already been highlighted by the media in previous reports.
Judicial Recusals to 26 June 2014:
24 March 2014 Livingston Sheriff Court Sheriff Edington Civil Court report prepared by spouse of a resident sheriff.
8 April 2014 Forfar Sheriff Court Sheriff Veal Criminal Sheriff personally known to a witness.
10 April 2014 Selkirk Sheriff Court Sheriff Paterson Civil Sheriff had previously acted for a client in dispute against Pursuer.
23 April 2014 High Court Lady Wise Criminal Senator had previously acted for a relative of accused.
16 April 2014 Glasgow Sheriff Court Sheriff Cathcart Criminal Sheriff personally known to a witness.
13 May 2014 Haddington Sheriff Court Sheriff Braid Civil Known to pursuer's family.
14 May 2014 High Court Judge MacIver Criminal (appeal) Conflict of Interest.
20 May 2014 Court of Session Lord Matthews Civil Senator personally known to a witness.
19 June 2014 Dingwall Sheriff Court Sheriff McPartlin Criminal Sheriff presided over a trial involving the accused, where the issue to which the new case relates was spoken to by a witness.
20 June 2014 Elgin Sheriff Court Sheriff Raeburn QC Criminal Accused appeared before Sheriff as a witness in recent trial relating to same incident.
24 June 2014 Glasgow Sheriff Court Sheriff Crozier Criminal Sheriff personally known to proprietor of premises libelled in the charge.
26 June 2014 Court of Session Lord President Civil Relative of Senator acts for the respondent.
With no recusals on financial grounds - due to judges refusing to disclose hidden investments, secret wealth, work for law firms & offshore tax trusts among other interests … the current way the recusal data is presented is worth little to the public or court users and does not promote increased transparency of Scotland’s judiciary.
Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations by Diary of Injustice including reports from the media, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee deliberations on Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary
Not bad at all.You really got to them Peter otherwise we wouldnt even know this much!
ReplyDeleteCatching out the top judge is quite a thing and should prove to everyone your register of interests for the judiciary is a must have.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work.
So they waited for the case to actually go to court before judge Gill had to recuse himself on the day because of his son.
ReplyDeleteWell this is a ridiculous state of affairs.
Surely both sides in the case knew the identity of the judge for their hearing before it took place.
Did the clients on both side of the court know of this conflict of interest beforehand?
Did their lawyers say anything before the actual court hearing?
Who pays for the wasted time on the recusal and all the lawyers fees?
Which judge replaced Gill and why are the names of the judges who replace the recused judges not being published?
This Judicial Office has much to answer.
Obviously you were right all along - they are all related to or are doing business with each other and dont want us to know.
ReplyDeleteWhat we really need to have investigated is whether these known relationships have not been declared in the past so that influence is used to effect the outcome of the case?
ReplyDeleteIt is highly suspicious that the Scottish Judiciary wanted to keep all of this a secret from the Scottish Public?
This attitude in itself, shows that the Scottish Judiciary's Judgment cannot be relied upon anymore.
With the nepotism that has gone on within the Scottish Judicial System over generations, it is almost guaranteed that relationships between Scottish Judges and family/others have been used and abused over and over again as it is the perfect crime, with zero chance of them ever being caught-out. That is until the champions of Public Service Journalism the DOI came to the rescue of the Scottish Public?
Litigation taught me this lesson, never use the courts again and never trust lawyers. As for a Judge standing down from a case, all he has to do is get a colleague to take his place and arrange the outcome as he would have done. They are a law unto themselves.
ReplyDeleteBetter to stay away from lawyers people, they never lose and you cannot win.
dumbass judge should tell the whole story in that list
ReplyDeleteand we only know about it thanks to you
ReplyDeleteGood thing we have you and Moi Ali watching the judges otherwise it would have been covered up!
Civil litigation is enrichment for lawyers and a stitch up for the client. If statistics were honestly published it would become even more evident why they don't want a Register of Interests. Mr Gill and his profession are friends of big business to the extent that the capitalists control the courts to hold on to their capital. Scotland's Courts are a business where judges get secret bonuses and favourable business links for killing of litigation cases after the lawyers get their legal aid reward and then get their bonus from the private sector they are linked to. No wonder they want to keep this model the way it is, a money making, justice destroying and client destroying scam. Learn from those who have tried civil litigation and don't go to court, all the legal profession are friends of the party you are in litigation against, you cannot possible win.
ReplyDeleteThis is where real power lies in an unelected secretive exploitative group of crooks purporting to work in a justice system. It does not matter which judge stands aside, the outcome will still be engineered as if he had not stood down. Do they think we are fools? We know them so well from past experience of dealing with lawyers. Why do they ruin clients for ££££££££££££££££? It is because they can and know the client has no remedy.
ReplyDelete.....what about all of the other times when no one was looking.....?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteLets face it the people's representatives our beloved MSP's agree with Mr Gill as far as reform is concerned. As Kant wrote 'This corrupt system, however must naturally be given no publicity if it is to succeed'.
The judiciary have contempt for the Scottish people and see them as an underclass to be exploited for the profits of the lawyers. I don't think a judge standing aside because of a conflict of interest will change the outcome of the case which will be pre determined anyway.
Civil Courts Review, why would Lord Gill implement this when not only his profession but also his son as a member of that profession will benefit from the status quo. I will never trust another lawyer because I know what they are. He is only standing aside in this case because we are reading about him via DOI and the Sunday Mail.
ReplyDeleteClearly something is VERY wrong when a judge can potentially decide a case involving a company in which he or members of his family have a financial interest - as DOI reported at;
ReplyDeletehttp://petercherbi.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/proceeds-of-crime-judicial-interests.html
For years they have made sure they bring their offspring into the Family Business?
ReplyDeleteYou have got to ask yourself WHY?
The Judges don't only hold people in contempt of court, they have contempt for the Scottish people who they use as stock to increase their wealth. Mr Gill would hold DOI in contempt if he could. Truth hurts eh lawyers. Don't see any of you rejecting DOI reports.
ReplyDeleteThis is a Power Game that they play to make sure that they hold all of the cards of the game all of the time?
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the Law Society of Scotland's Guarantee Fund?
The only truth is that they Guarantee to give you zero £ recompense after your crooked Scottish lawyer robs you blind and ruins your life?
Such is their hatred and utter contempt for the 'common' man?
Given that there has been absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever of the Scottish Judiciary and given that family nepotism is rife in their insular industry, then at least in theory, it would be the easiest of crimes to commit were a family member to say to a Client who is as guilty as sin to say, look, it's alright my Da' is a Judge I will get him to let you off Scot-Free, safe in the knowledge that the Scottish Public would never know that this could be going on in secrecy in oak panelled rooms?
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder doesn't it.......?
I'm presuming they kept the son and ejected the father as a tactic otherwise why did it end up going to a full court hearing before someone realised the son of the Lord President was in front of his father and no one had said anything up to that point.
ReplyDeleteWhoever the other party is should be asking a few questions about how this came about.
As you rightly point out and in all fairness the public are owed a fuller explanation of events in light of your petition at the parliament and how this system of recording recusals came into being in the first place.
@10 July 2014 18:55
ReplyDeleteGood points ...
There is no official indication from the Judicial Office or Scottish Court Service at this point on who asked for the recusal of Lord Gill or whether he recused himself after realising on the day his son was before him.
The lack of detail in the way recusals are currently recorded appears to be deliberately vague, allowing judges to avoid admissions which may well help other litigants in court ...
@ 10 July 2014 19:46
Many relationships and interests have not been declared in the past and are still not being declared today ... which is why a complete and public register of judicial interests is needed ...
As far as any investigation into the lack of declarations by the judiciary in the past ... don't expect someone with a vested interest to find someone else with a vested interest failed to disclose a vested interest ...
@ 11 July 2014 09:37
More to come on that story soon ...
@ 11 July 2014 10:54
Good points ... it must have been obvious prior to the court hearing a conflict of interest existed ... and therefore why that conflict could not be resolved before the hearing took place is something the public have a right to know .. as well as who replaced Lord Gill and the nature of the court action.
Good points ... it must have been obvious prior to the court hearing a conflict of interest existed ... and therefore why that conflict could not be resolved before the hearing took place is something the public have a right to know .. as well as who replaced Lord Gill and the nature of the court action.
ReplyDelete11 July 2014 11:25
-------------------------------
There is something decidedly fishy about all of this. it simply is not credible that this could have happened?
It seems as though, Lord Gill has been 'caught out' by somebody who has knowledge of this relationship, questioning the propriety of it considering that Recusals have now begun?
This back of the envelope style of management of the Scottish Judiciary is symptomatic of how far standards have slumped and shows that they are still protecting their 'Precious' like a gang of Golums, who treat the Scottish Public as their sworn enemy who they worry could take their 'Precious' from them if they knew what was really going on?
What is going on with the Scottish Judiciary when they can 'pair-up' Lord Gill with his son's case in the first place?
ReplyDeleteIn a fair system, the Client should be able to pursue the Court for fixing an unlawful process in the first place and given that they initially arranged for the Process to be corrupt under ECHR, then what assurance has the Client got that the Court can be trusted not to fix-up the case in the future?
If it is left to a Judge to Declare an Interest and Recuse themselves means that the System has already failed, not as The Lord President would have us believe that this shows that the System works!
I would be surprised if the client victim in this case knows anything about this because remember that the Court is not about the Client (they are just filling-in the blanks where their name goes on the Court papers), the Court Process is there to serve the Judges and lawyers. End of?
The result of a Court case is largely irrelevant?
There must be an enormous temptation to place yourself as the Judge to your son's cases so that you can get him off to a flyer in his legal career and build up his reputation, especially as being a Scottish Judge you are a law unto yourself and especially because nobody would ever find out?
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting for a police investigation to find out just how widespread this gambit is?
Looks like Cherbi scored a bullseye against Gill on this register/recusal thing!
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your post and the comments I find it difficult to believe anything these judges now tell us.
ReplyDeleteThere are a few other entries on this recusal list we should be told more about.
e.g
"23 April 2014 High Court Lady Wise Criminal Senator had previously acted for a relative of accused" What is the actual case and charges which caused Lady Wise to withdraw?
"14 May 2014 High Court Judge MacIver Criminal (appeal) Conflict of Interest" What was the actual Conflict of Interest? There are no details provided.Very poor list compiled by the judiciary - obviously designed this way to keep everyone guessing so no one gets to find out anything more than they want us to know.
Keep digging.Brilliant blog.
10:54am today
ReplyDeleteYou were correct in your first sentence.
This is a well known and well used tactic putting a relative in front of a judge.
I should know because I used to work for the Scottish Court Service.
As far I was aware when based in Edinburgh, no one outside the legal profession knew or wanted to publicise these relationships until you came along.My former colleagues tell me your petition is causing the judges a bit of angst.Well done.
Take it from me they are not a very nice bunch of people to work for and some of their interfering siblings (some not yet in the legal profession) who come along to the courts expecting to be treated like lords and ladies are equally as nasty as their parents.
Anyone remember a colleague who was sacked for not allowing in Lord *'s daughter who threw a fit and screamed she would see to it the member of staff lost their job?
Oh the stories I could tell about what really goes on in the SCS.
Oh yes the courts are being used for profit and lots of lining of the pockets of lawyers and all with the blessing of the judges.So much for justice in Scotland!
ReplyDelete@ 11 July 2014 13:04
ReplyDeleteThere will be no Police investigation ... at least not one where the Police would be allowed a free hand by the Crown Office interests ...
@ 11 July 2014 14:07
Send in your work experiences to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
Transparency of the judiciary & information on how the courts operate is publicised by DOI in the public interest ...
Anyone who has witnessed the interminable delays and unnecessary multiple court hearings to string the cases along knows that the Scottish Judiciary Court System is a money-making-racket and is primarily run to make money for Scottish lawyers who care more about fattening their wallet than they care about winning a case?
ReplyDeleteThen when you consider that if you have the misfortune to ever have to use the Court of Session you have to get a lawyer and then your lawyer has to get an 'Edinburgh lawyer' and then this 'Edinburgh lawyer' hires a Queens Counsel (Barrister)?
A very convoluted method whereby every shark gets into the feeding frenzy (your bank balance)?
And god forbid you query their double or triple bill?
Every time you are tricked into one of the many and wholly unnecessary meetings with Counsel (often with no prior agenda, so you are unaware of what they are wanting to talk about - and you only find out afterwards that the whole thing could have been achieved by correspondence by email) you find out that you are billed for the services of Counsel for the day even though the meeting was only an hour?
They pretend to justify this by saying, oh yes but the Counsel has had to prepare for the meeting?
Then, when you add in the cost of the meeting room, the fee for your lawyer, the fee for your lawyers lawyer (who doesn't turn up but sends his assistant trainee lawyer to take notes of what was said) plus your own time and money it is understandable to be aggrieved of being robbed out of £5,000.00 each time for something that could have been achieved by email for £5?
The Scottish Justice System is a game of Monopoly, where the Scottish lawyers and Judges collect £200,000.00 every time they pass GO and they all have Get Out Of Jail Free Cards and have the power to give the same to their pals?
Diary of Injustice said...
ReplyDelete@ 11 July 2014 13:04
There will be no Police investigation ... at least not one where the Police would be allowed a free hand by the Crown Office interests ...
()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()(()()()()(
It is a sad state of affairs when we can no longer rely on the protection of the police, as they are controlled by Scottish lawyers at the Procurator Fiscals Office and the Crown Office?
If we are supposed to believe this partial list, this means that there are recusals all the time?
ReplyDeleteDoes this not exemplify that the Scottish Judiciary have too many conflicting outside Interests which clash with their ability to do their jobs?
Who is it that appoints a Judge to a particular case or is it left to the Judge to pick cases based on their own choice?
These are crucial questions that require a full and complete answer considering?
If we believe them, the Scottish Court Service have no clue whatsoever about family relationships within the Judiciary and Scottish lawyers?
ReplyDeleteThese people are laughing at us because they think we are fools?
If this was the case, then the people at the Scottish Court Service are hopelessly negligent and unfit to do their jobs and should be sacked forthwith?
This list is rubbish.I am fighting a bank in the Court of Session and I have been told the judge has shares in it but my lawyer wont ask him to recuse and says if I press the point he will withdraw from acting for me
ReplyDeleteCorrupt or what!
Whatever the outcome now one thing is for sure - we all now know these judges are too well connected and must declare all their links,interests and other your register is looking for.
ReplyDeleteDad & Lad LLP
ReplyDeleteParliament House
Edinburgh
EH1 1RQ
Well!
ReplyDeleteEven if Lord Gill and his pals on the bench want to cover up their relationships and dodgy business at least you and the press are keeping us informed!
Your efforts on all matters legal deserve far more than a round of applause!
Just curious .. read the following and tell me if you think same figures apply to the legal profession in Scotland.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28282050
Pope Francis: 'About 2%' of Catholic clergy paedophiles
Pope Francis has been quoted as saying that reliable data indicates that "about 2%" of clergy in the Catholic Church are paedophiles.
The Pope said that abuse of children was like "leprosy" infecting the Church, according to the Italian La Repubblica newspaper.
He vowed to "confront it with the severity it demands".
To think that there were no records taken of recusals is just plain daft?
ReplyDeleteThis is like saying the Scottish Justice System is being run like the wee corner shope?
They know exactly which Scottish Judge is fixed with each case?
To not know would be an incredible admission of extreme negligence and possibly criminally so?
I am glad the legal mafia were never able to buy you off because your blog provides the prime reason (that of a thoroughly corrupt legal system and legal profession right up to the judiciary) proving Scotland is not ready to stand on its own as an independent country.People have read it understood it and know themselves if you dont have justice you have nothing because all can be manipulated against you by politicians who claim to be for Scotland but who just go on and use the system as it is to manipulate things for their own ends like the Scottish Government have been doing all along since 2007.We are 7 years on and nothing has changed and if anything now we know the judiciary are themselves thoroughly corrupt and cannot even stand to answer the Scottish Parliament on your petition or your investigations of their status and what they secretly are doing out of public view.
ReplyDeleteScotland's justice system cannot be trusted and we cannot risk becoming a small country with these people controlling our future for their own pockets.
Butler Sloss recuses herself out of the abuse inquiry!Do you think people are beginning to get the message on judges??
ReplyDeleteLong discussion on your petition at the Court of Session with a certain judge saying out loud he is most offended at your request he declares all interests to the msps who the judge went on to label "fly by night Community Councillors"
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think of that?
@ 12 July 2014 11:54
ReplyDeleteName of the judge, bank and parties involved including law firms to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
@ 12 July 2014 20:46
You can be assured of considerable vested interests with such a firm ...
@ 13 July 2014 21:42
Same or higher ... there are several cases where solicitors have been involved in abuse of children including children of clients ... most are never prosecuted because the Law Society see to it no charges, not enough evidence or some other excuse allow the solicitor either to carry on working or slip away into another job.
Cases of abuse involving members of the legal profession are only exposed when the media become involved .. so people who are victims of physical, sexual or other abuse by members of the legal profession should contact the media instead of relying on the in-house cover up team of the Law Society, COPFS & sympathetic members of the judiciary.
@ 14 July 2014 12:13
Whatever the position of Scotland after the independence vote you can be assured the legal profession and justice system will be as rotten, unfit for purpose, self serving, self protecting, and "Victorian" as it is now ...
@14 July 2014 12:37
... hope so!
People should understand that unjust laws, public policies and injustice is permeated on the back of judicial backing by judges who are allowed to accrue vast secret wealth, some of whom are tax dodgers, others who have criminal records, engage in fraud .. and have far too many vested interests which should be declared ...
@ 14 July 2014 14:03
If his eye offends him ...
"fly by night Community Councillors" ... this judge should attend the Scottish Parliament and make this argument while refusing to declare his interests ...
Nice to see a lively debate on what the judges are up to instead of them preaching to us!
ReplyDeleteI dont believe for one minute these judges have declared any such relationships in the past.It has all been covered up and a lot of cases of conflict of interest are still being covered up by the sounds of some of the comments.
ReplyDeleteWhen are the msps going to make this law?It is not a difficult argument to make that judges must declare everything now we know they have everything to hide.
An uncle of mine was on the phone today when I went into his house very angry with the way an energy company was treating him. I told him it is like that dealing with lawyers because there is no complaints system and until he is in the position I and many others were in with crooked lawyers his situation while important to him would pale into insignificance if he had to deal with the Law Society. Scottish lawyers are legalized thieves no wonder they want to keep this system as it is.
ReplyDeleteIt is a sad state of affairs when we can no longer rely on the protection of the police, as they are controlled by Scottish lawyers at the Procurator Fiscals Office and the Crown Office?
ReplyDelete==================================
When you are in a dispute with a Scottish lawyer you become a stateless person as far as getting justice against that lawyer who is responsible for your ruination. Everywhere you go no one in an official capacity wants to know. The civil courts are not for justice they are money making machines for the Judiciary.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThis list is rubbish.I am fighting a bank in the Court of Session and I have been told the judge has shares in it but my lawyer wont ask him to recuse and says if I press the point he will withdraw from acting for me
Corrupt or what!
12 July 2014 11:54
££££££££££££££££££££££££££
My case involved an insidious situation where the Judge should have recused himself.....when I asked my lawyer if they were going to report the Judge for not recusing themselves, I was told it would not be fair on the Judge because he had a good reputation!
This sounds like the paedophile's Charter.....you cannot report the paedophile because you would damage their 'good reputation'!
This has got out of control because the Law Society of Scotland's notorious facilitation regime where they covet crooked Scottish lawyers and train them to have zero morals and they do not give a hoot about anyone bar themselves?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteJust curious .. read the following and tell me if you think same figures apply to the legal profession in Scotland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28282050
Pope Francis: 'About 2%' of Catholic clergy paedophiles
Pope Francis has been quoted as saying that reliable data indicates that "about 2%" of clergy in the Catholic Church are paedophiles.
The Pope said that abuse of children was like "leprosy" infecting the Church, according to the Italian La Repubblica newspaper.
He vowed to "confront it with the severity it demands".
13 July 2014 21:42
---------------------------------------------------
More like 20%
Maybe he is going to get a Scottish QC and Judge to make sure these pedo's are prosecuted through the courts?
Any takers?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteButler Sloss recuses herself out of the abuse inquiry!Do you think people are beginning to get the message on judges??
14 July 2014 12:37
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
BS at first said that she had no intention of recusing herself, even though her own brother was compromised over the same subject?
Similarly, the Home Secretary still thinks there is no need for BS to recuse herself because she still believes that BS's integrity is above reproach?
They just DO NOT GET IT?
They have their heads stuck so far up their arses, in their own artificial bubble of being unaccountable that they can no longer see the blatantly obvious?
Dear Lord!
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteLong discussion on your petition at the Court of Session with a certain judge saying out loud he is most offended at your request he declares all interests to the msps who the judge went on to label "fly by night Community Councillors"
What do you think of that?
14 July 2014 14:03
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Heavens to Murgatroyd!
Whatever the position of Scotland after the independence vote you can be assured the legal profession and justice system will be as rotten, unfit for purpose, self serving, self protecting, and "Victorian" as it is now ...
ReplyDeleteAmen to that!and let this be a lesson to anyone stupid enough to deal with or go near a Scottish lawyer or judge!
How many man hours are lost in all of these recusals and who is being charged for all of this lost time?
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that with an efficiently run Scottish Judicial System, without all of the lost time and reorganisation caused by recusals, there would be no delays and a lot more business would be done saving £Millions for the tax payer?
It also raises the question that, with all of these recusals and the consequential cancelled and restarted processes, are the Scottish Judiciary working the sufficient hours to fulfill their enormous and over paid contracts?
As someone who claims to be from the SCS wrote in an earlier comment this situation of a legal representative appearing before their relative on the bench is a frequent occurrence and has never been officially recorded until now - thanks to you.
ReplyDeleteNot one recusal listed on financial grounds so basically the list is a fit up as you point out.
ReplyDeleteSince the promise was made to msps by Gill about recusals are the msps going to probe this data in more detail|?
"Senator of the court of session"
ReplyDeleteThink its about time to ditch these titles and lordships because it has clearly gone to their heads and given Gill & co too much power
When the Court cases were being assigned a Scottish Judge, all you could hear behind the closed door was, no we cannot have you presiding over your sons case, that would be a Serious Conflict of Interest...............Err, Och No, it will be fine, remember I am a Scottish Judge and I can be trusted not to let this sort of thing affect my judgement?
ReplyDeleteI do not tell lies, and that is the Truth???
Anyway, the 'frequent-flyer-useless-eaters' will never find out, will they?
It would be interesting for a Police Investigation to examine whether or not the Scottish Court are governed by written Management Policies, Procedures and secure systems to make sure they carry out due diligence to safeguard against miscarriages of justice taking place where it is POSSIBLE for these Conflicts of Interest to arise?
ReplyDeleteIt is inconceivable that they be allowed to use the excuse that their management control system is so lax that they be allowed to use this an excuse for these 'deliberate mistakes' to be made, thereby letting them off the hook?
If there are Recusals occurring within the Scottish Justice System then why the hell is someone not losing their job over this scandal?
It's as if they see no great importance or alarm about having to recuse themselves?
What are these numpties getting paid for?
Old Kaiser Gill sitting there wearing a Pickelhaube and having to declare because his son shows up!
ReplyDeleteDid no one bother to tell either party before the court hearing took place?You couldn't make this up its so daft and maybe a little sinister it came to court before he had to declare!
Do you think that once folk have cottoned on to this familial link that they have tried to capatalise on this relationship to facilitate the winning of their case?
ReplyDeleteJust as well we have good old Scottish Judges then?
An answer to a question your readers may be asking - A drunken Law Society twit at the weekend bragging said they had made sure the beeb kept away from your petition.He also said the beeb are going to be forced by the Law Society to pay compensation to lawyers mentioned in the Lawyers Behaving Badly sketch..
ReplyDelete@ 16 July 2014 12:16
ReplyDeleteIf true, the matter of Lawyers Behaving Badly may be worthy of a headline ... more details please to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
@ 15 July 2014 23:37
This has been practice in the courts for years, with no recusals and no fear of it being recorded ... and there are currently cases in the courts where members of the judiciary have conflicts of interest in relation to their personal activities ...
The courts are a racket and anyone daft enough to believe otherwise is either too greedy or too stupid.
ReplyDeleteJudges and lawyers have rigged cases in their own interests for years and THANK GOD you came along to give it the expose it deserves!
Yes you are correct as always - we have put too much trust and power in the hands of the judges and they have used it to line their own pockets!
ReplyDeleteWho cares about the BBC? Everything you really need to know about lawyers is on this site!
ReplyDeleteThe lawyers and judges know exactly what they are doing and who knows who its just clients who dont know any of this or what is really going on in the courts.Wonder how many times Gill and the rest of them have not recused themselves its probably thousands of times!
ReplyDeleteAre Scottish Judges reprimanded for having to recuse themselves, for having too many outside interests from their core function?
ReplyDeleteIs it known if there is a person nominated at the Scottish Court Service who hand cases to each Judge or are all of the cases laid out, so that the Scottish Judges can 'cherry-pick' which cases they want to preside over?
ReplyDeleteAre there written down procedures and policy's to ensure safeguards are put in place to ensure that there is no jiggery pokery that can go on and if so is there a named person who controls this process?
This website is a fantastic resource for the Scottish Public to find out about Scottish Legal Crooks.
ReplyDeleteIt certainly fulfills the role of a Public Service Reporting facility, as it brings awareness about what is really going on in Scotland and tries to shame them into change because the Police and the Justice Secretary don't seem to care.
The DOI journalists should be awarded for their integrity, honesty and frankness about this cancer drawing Scotland to her knees.
Is this a case of the Scottish Judiciary having too many fingers in many pies?
ReplyDeleteI thought the reason they were paid exorbitant salaries was to compensate them for not having other interests, financial and otherwise, that could potentially cause them to recuse themselves and prevent them from doing their job?
Looks like they have been slurping up the gravy, behind closed doors?
It seems highly suspicious that Scottish Judges and Sheriffs seem to be able to make up their own rules whenever they choose?
ReplyDeleteI asked about a case calling in Court. The Clerk asked me who I was and if I was related to either party in the hearing?
I said I was a member of the Public with an Interest?
The Court Clerk replied that I was not allowed in to the Public Gallery to watch proceedings, despite other members of the Public already being in there?
When I asked her why I was not allowed in, the Clerk replied it is up to the Sheriff if he allows the Public in and he can do what he likes?
I did not know the Sheriff/ he did not know me. This was just another example of abuse of power (because the can get away with it)?
There is no such thing anymore as Hearings held under scrutiny of the Public. Just ask the Scottish Solicitor Discipline Tribunal because they DO NOT allow the Public access to scrutinise their dealings despite was they say on their website to mislead the Scottish Public?
Quite an achievement forcing Scotland's top judge out of a case and only because he now has to publish this information.Doubtless we will hear more legal scandals soon..
ReplyDeleteAre we expected to take this 'half-hearted' effort to disclose Scottish Judiciary's recusals as adequate or should we insist on transparency to make sure Scottish Justice is not only done but that it is seen to be done?
ReplyDeleteHow can this sort of thing be allowed to go on in Scotland?
ReplyDeleteIf you listen and watch BBC Scotland and Scottish TV News you would think that everything is rosy in the garden?
The Diary of Injustice journalists are doing a great job especially since the Citizens Advice Bureau in Scotland have been co-opted by the Law Society of Scotland?
ReplyDeleteI noticed the other day that Scotland's Court System comes to a grinding halt at the end of July when the Courts shut their doors for two months for their 'Summer Recess' whatever that means?
ReplyDeleteThis is where Judges are paid between £40-60,000.00 for not to be in Court?
Then when they come back to work they recommence their overseas busmans holidays on the Scottish Tax-Payer?
I feel sorry for all of the cats losing their skins?
Would it not be preferable for these Scottish Judges to make sure all of their overseas jollies are restricted to these two months, so that the dysfunctional Scottish Justice System can be effective where it serves the purpose for the People of Scotland and not as some kind of hardship pastime it seems to being treated at the moment?
How many day's a year do these Scottish Judges actually work?
If there is even the slightest risk that a Scottish Court Case could have been fixed then the police must investigate the past court records to find out if this has been going on and how frequently?
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean that you could be going to court with a case where you have a 100% chance of winning because of prime facie documentary corroborating evidence but because of these relationships you lose the case?
ReplyDeleteThis would be so easy for them to get away with because you need the permission of the Judge to allow you to appeal and if he/she refuses, then you have no way of holding them to account for their decisions?
Also, Ms Moi Ali has highlighted that bona fide complaints about Scottish Judges are routinely quashed, to protect the reputation of the Judge not to uphold the law?
What is the point of using a Scottish lawyer and using a Scottish Court Case?
This reminds me of a Sheriff who shouted and barracked a young 16 year old girl to cause her to sob and cry uncontrollably and then he cruelly cursed at her saying that it was her own fault for coming into HIS court!
This is the conduct of someone who is completely above the law and knows that he can say what he likes and behave how he likes safe in the knowledge that it will be covered up?
Potentially there are thousands of cases where this has happened before or with some other relative and no one has known about it or been told by their lawyers.
ReplyDeleteScottish courts are totally corrupt and run by totally corrupt people.
I am confused about how a situation like this can exist where a Judge's son can be the QC appearing in his father's court.
ReplyDeleteAn urgent independent investigation needs to be carried out, preferably by the police, to find out how this could happen and why there is apparently no systems in place to forsee this conflict of interest
What if Lord Gill had stayed silent and allowed the case to proceed without letting on?
ReplyDeleteWould this be a criminal offence?
Has this sort of thing happened already and if so, how prevalent is this practice?
If this has happened before, then from this point on the Judge's reliability to be able to be impartial must be called into question for every single case they have presided on ever since as it casts into doubt his judgement?
So that's why they call it jobs for the boy(s)?
ReplyDeleteThis seems to fit you!If you had not written this blog I dont think anyone ever would have done to the legal system what you have done!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28481215
Malini Agarwal: 'Passion' is the key to good blogging
The growth of the internet has changed the way many people work, and created many new ways of making a living.
Millions of people get involved in writing blogs for fun, but only some are managing to make money.
In India, blogging on Bollywood can really click with your audience. Sameer Hashmi reports.
Do you think that Lord Gill has published that he has had to recuse himself because he thinks that this will show that Scottish Judges are recusing themselves and that this is a good thing?
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, he totally misses the point?
It is evidence that the system has failed when a Scottish Judge has been forced to recuse themself?
Is their inquiry into the circumstances causing the recusal for each case, so that the reasons can be recorded, so that they cannot come up again and cause a further delay in a subsequent case and to research previous court cases to test whether or not this relationship/ association has been declared in the past?
This is a massive and continuing scandal?
FYI Your report on Gill prompted an expert witness to withdraw his attendance and evidence for the defenders in a civil case.Turns out the witness has a business relationship with numerous judges and they fear you know about it.
ReplyDeleteWho pays for these unnecessary delays when there is a recusal?
ReplyDelete@ 28 July 2014 11:27
ReplyDeleteQuite a few "Expert Witnesses" have undeclared financial links and other relationships to members of the judiciary and law firms ...
Please send any details on the specific case in to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
Diary of Injustice said...
ReplyDelete@ 28 July 2014 11:27
Quite a few "Expert Witnesses" have undeclared financial links and other relationships to members of the judiciary and law firms ...
Please send any details on the specific case in to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
31 July 2014 17:11
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Please, Please, Please expose these people who are crooks in your fantastic blog. I used to read novels but I have stopped because reading the truth about these crooks in your blog shows that real life really does imitate art.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/21/0/Principles-of-Judicial-Ethics
Ethics and oaths, utter bullshit, have a read and make up your own mind.
28 July 2014 21:51
---------------------------------------------------------
In a Scottish court case the exasperated defendant shouted out at the Sheriff that he had made a blatant 'mistake' in the previous hearing which resulted in his damage and cost.
The Sheriff's reply was, 'I quite believe you. I am known for making lots of mistakes. Your problem is that You are in My Court and My Decision is final, whether it is the truth or not.....'
What chance do you have?
Diary of Injustice said...
ReplyDelete@ 28 July 2014 11:27
Quite a few "Expert Witnesses" have undeclared financial links and other relationships to members of the judiciary and law firms ...
Please send any details on the specific case in to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com
31 July 2014 17:11
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Isn't it the case that if a so-called expert witness is accredited by the Law Society of Scotland it means that there is a propensity for their testimony to be tailored to suit whatever is in the best interests of crooked Scottish lawyers and the Law Society of Scotland?
It seems like corruption with Scotland's lawyers and Scotland's Judiciary has poisoned the system from within to the extent that it is no longer doing the job it is supposed to be doing?
ReplyDeleteThe Clinical Psychologist asked their patient, the serial killer, the following question: What's the difference between a Scottish lawyer and an onion?
ReplyDeleteThe serial killer's answer: You cry when you cut up an onion.
There is something smelly about this. As smelly as a tramp's underpants?
ReplyDeleteIf the only thing that was to prevent this case from proceeding was the conscience of a Scottish Judge then we are in serious trouble?
This is such a massive scandal that it is incredulous that the mouthpiece of the Law Society of Scotland Kenny MacAskill has not arranged for a Public Inquiry to be set-up to get to the bottom of this mess or alternatively to report the matter to the Police?
His silence is extremely suspicious and is yet more evidence that Scotland has been hijacked by bandits and the People of Scotland are being laughed at?
It transpires that the number of complaints about Scottish Judges and Scottish Sheriffs remains at a consistently high level but they do not want YOU to know about this?
ReplyDeleteIt just goes to show that there are systems put in place where complaints against Scotland's Judiciary are binned as a default measure, to try to maintain a false veneer that everything is OK?
Ms Moi Ali, was right and she paid with her job for exposing the self regulatory help system in operation?
How can you fix a problem if it is consistently being hidden in plain sight?
Is this not an example of the SCS putting Lord Gill in a compromising situation?
ReplyDeleteRevenge of the Gill now he is banning newspapers from the courts.The judges cannot be trusted!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteRevenge of the Gill now he is banning newspapers from the courts.The judges cannot be trusted!
6 August 2014 19:19
XxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxX
I'm sure they will all miss Page 3...
oh!caught out smartly!
ReplyDeleteWonder how often this has happened before now and no one bothered to say anything!
Aye if Cherbi had not started this off we'd never know a damn thing about the judges and why dont they tell us the cases affected by these recusals and why it happens all a cover up again but thanks to you it is coming out slowly but surely
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of a loony justice system allows a judge to sit in a court and then his own son shows up!
ReplyDeleteScotland must be totally bonkers!
hmm just read this on twitter I am with the last comment
ReplyDeleteHow can the son of a top judge go into a court run by his own father and it only comes out when all the parties show up in court?
If I understand your points correctly your top judge who recused only does so because the recusal is now recorded and this is thanks to your efforts and publicity.