Friday, February 07, 2014

Seven years on, Lord Gill’s Civil courts reforms head to Parliament as Scots face prospect of little change on access to poor quality, expensive & selective civil justice system

Victorian and late, Civil Courts reform will change little in Scots justice system. SEVEN YEARS after Lord President Lord Brian Gill (then Lord Justice Clerk) was commissioned in 2007 to study Scotland's expensive closed shop civil justice system which culminated in the unremarkable 2009 Civil Courts Review conclusion that ‘things had to change’, the Scottish Government have today finally announced plans to bring the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill to the Scottish Parliament for consideration by MSPs later this year.

The much heralded Gill Civil Courts Review published in 2009 which can be viewed online here : Scottish Civil Courts Review Synopsis, Scottish Civil Courts Review Vol1 Chapters 1-9 & Scottish Civil Courts Review Vol2 Chapters 10-15 has so far impacted little on how Scots are able to access justice in the Scottish courts. At the time, Lord Gill branded Scotland’s civil justice as “Victorian” and “failing society”. Little has changed from those criticisms some seven years on.

However, many of the reforms proposed by Lord Gill in 2009 which could have helped the man on the street gain a hearing in court have unsurprisingly been opposed by the legal profession and solicitors who are concerned they will lose their long held almost exclusive rights of audience and ability to charge whatever they want for legal services.

If anything, several of Lord Gill’s key recommendations published over four years ago including those which criticised the justice system as being expensive and out of reach in 2009, are now long out of date, due to the shocking and ever rising costs of legal representation and costs of court time and services which litigants have compared being akin to “extortion charges demanded by protection rackets.”

Published today, in what is clear an attempt to take the sting of the embarrassment suffered by Justice Secretary who yesterday lost his battle to the long held safeguard of corroboration of evidence from the criminal justice system, the Scottish Government have heralded a number of changes which are claimed as a substantial improvement on what is currently nothing short of a money spinning closed shop Civil justice business model for the legal profession, and the judiciary.

The Scottish Government claims the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill implements many of the recommendations of the Scottish Civil Courts Review, led by principal reviewer Lord Gill and commissioned in 2007. Lord Gill recommended substantial changes to modernise and improve the structure and operation of the courts, which he described in the review as ‘slow, inefficient and expensive’.

The Bill will also modernise Scotland’s courts by introducing greater specialisation and enabling more user-friendly procedures. Key provisions in the bill include:

• Increasing the threshold under which the sheriff court can deal with civil cases from £5,000 to £150,000 - freeing up the Court of Session to deal with the most challenging civil disputes. This is expected to strengthen the role of the sheriff court, while reducing costs and delays for litigants.

• Creation of a new national personal injury sheriff court, where such cases will be heard by specialist sheriffs.

• Creation of a national Sheriff Appeal Court to deal with summary criminal appeals from sheriff and justice of the peace courts, and civil appeals from sheriff courts. This will help avoid the need for some civil appeals to be heard in the Court of Session and some criminal appeals in the High Court, delivering more proportionate costs, while preserving the right to appeal to the higher courts.

• Creation of a new judicial post – the summary sheriff - to resolve lower value civil cases such as debt cases more swiftly and efficiently, while also dealing with summary criminal cases.

• Plans for specialist sheriffs and specialist summary sheriffs in areas of law such as family, housing, personal injury and commercial law, with the expertise to deal with these issues as swiftly as possible.

• New procedures for judicial review cases in the Court of Session including a three month time limit, and new procedures for appeals within the Court of Session and some appeals to the UK Supreme Court to improve efficiency.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said: “As highlighted by Lord Gill, our civil justice courts have remained relatively unchanged for more than a generation and need to be made more effective and efficient. This bill takes forward our commitment to ensure that Scotland’s civil justice system becomes more accessible, affordable and efficient for those people who need to resolve civil disputes.

He continued: “At present many lower value personal injury cases are raised in the Court of Session costing the parties a disproportionate amount and clogging up the court. In future, most of these cases will be able to be raised in the specialist personal injury court with specialist sheriffs and procedures designed to achieve settlement swiftly and at a proportionate cost to the parties. The sheriff courts are well placed to handle this transfer as the total cases coming out of the Court of Session is only around three per cent of the civil caseload in the sheriff courts.

MacAskill, who was once a High Street solicitor went on to claim: “Our reforms will help us ensure that the right cases are heard in the right places - reducing delays, cost and bureaucracy. They will also offer clearer routes to justice and more specialisation for a range of cases, from personal injury cases to family law.”

The Lord President, Lord Gill, said: “With the introduction of this Bill Scotland has the opportunity to have a civil justice system that is fit for a modern Scotland. Delay and cost have been the bane of Scottish justice for decades. These reforms will enable the courts to deliver the quality of justice to which the public is entitled. I am grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice for his support for the proposals of the Scottish Civil Courts Review and for his vision in promoting this legislation.”

Which? Executive Director Richard Lloyd said: "Getting the courts working better for people must mean cases being dealt with quickly and cost-effectively. Which? supports the plans under the Courts Reform Bill to move business below the value of £150,000 in to the Sheriff Courts as this will mean more consumers will be able to seek redress for poor services or faulty goods. That will be good for consumers and good for the many businesses that play fair with their customers."

The Scottish Government did not provide any supportive comments directly from litigants who have found it difficult to gain hearings in court, however Diary of Injustice can.

Commenting on the Scottish Government’s civil justice reform proposals, a personal litigant who has recently been charged tens of thousands of pounds for incomplete transcripts of court hearings before Scotland’s senior judges claimed the reforms do not go far enough.

He said: “It is all very well to produce press releases claiming advancements in justice but when litigants really need to use court services and find they cannot obtain legal representation, it is often the case court fees are too expensive, and of such poor quality that justice is unobtainable in the Scottish courts.”

He continued: “And even if you do have a solicitor, it will end up costing you thousands of pounds to achieve very little if anything.”

Speaking to Diary of Injustice today, a legal insider claimed the Civil Courts reforms will not serve to improve the image of Scotland’s expensive yet poor quality justice system at home or abroad.

He  said: “If the Justice Secretary hopes these piecemeal reforms will attract civil cases and other business to the Scottish courts, he will be sadly disappointed.”

He continued: “London’s courts, internationally respected and much less problematic than Scotland will continue to have clear advantages over the Scots model which is after all based upon a small jurisdiction widely associated with excessive legal fees, inferior legal services, and mounting problems with its judiciary.”

BACKGROUND TO CIVIL JUSTICE REFORM IN SCOTLAND

Lord Gill Lord Justice ClerkThe Lord Justice Clerk, now Lord President, Lord Gill, author of the Civil Courts Review. The Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Gill, in his speech to the Law Society of Scotland’s 60 year anniversary conference several years ago, reproduced in full here said : “The civil justice system in Scotland is a Victorian model that had survived by means of periodic piecemeal reforms. But in substance its structure and procedures are those of a century and a half ago. It is failing the litigant and it is failing society.

“It is essential that we should have a system that has disputes resolved at a judicial level that is appropriate to their degree of importance and that disputes should be dealt with expeditiously and efficiently and without unnecessary or unreasonable cost. That means that the judicial structure should be based on a proper hierarchy of courts and that the procedures should be appropriate to the nature and the importance of the case, in terms of time and cost. Scottish civil justice fails on all of these counts. Its delays are notorious. It costs deter litigants whose claims may be well-founded. Its procedures cause frustration and obstruct rather than facilitate the achievement of justice."

Previous articles on the Civil Courts Review and reforms of Scotland's antiquated civil justice system can be found on Diary of Injustice here: Scottish Civil Courts Review.

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a lot of rubbish from MacAskill and the judge.Do they want us to swallow a 7 year old cake?

Anyone who is stuck in the courts just now can tell you it is like being given some deadly disease and you have to pay for it.

Anonymous said...

Victorian and late, Civil Courts reform will change little in Scots justice system.

Victorian and greatly profitable. They don't want reform. MONEY THEIR GOD. The status quo allows them to rob clients, cover it up, and continue to practice because they are their own police force. Quite right DOI it is not a justice system, it is a money making racket for a Teflon faction.

I say again there is no complaints system in place as I am sure people will agree who have tried to use it. Lawyers don't want reform, they want obedience.

Anonymous said...

Excellent report.

Clearly the priority has been to create additional tiers of legal bureaucracy, aka 'jobs for the boys'.

And as you rightly point out, not a word about the insidious position party litigants find themselves placed in, nor indeed so much as a peep about another Gill recommendation - introducing Class Actions into Scots Law.

So all in all, just more window dressing.

Anonymous said...

This is all irrelevant and mere window dressing?

Unless we can be certain that Scottish Judges and Sheriffs are fit for purpose then this will be another embarkation on the legal gravy train and another excuse to strip cash from the Public purse?

Anonymous said...

The whole system is rotten to the core?

We need a Justice Secretary who understands the meaning of the word and instead of patronising people to ask the clients who have had to use the Scottish Courts?

Has he asked one single member of the Public or is he too busy scratching the back of Judges and the Law Society of Scotland?

Scotland - Probably the most corrupt small country in the World?

Anonymous said...

Gill said "It costs deter litigants whose claims may be well-founded. Its procedures cause frustration and obstruct rather than facilitate the achievement of justice."

There is nothing in ScotGov's bill that comes remotely near addressing this problem.

Just in the same way ABS (Tesco Law to the ignorant) was claimed to open up access to the justice system MacAskill's mangled bill is just another exercise in shutting out anyone who does not go through a solicitor.

Anonymous said...

Judicial Review in the Court of Session is widely regarded as a joke.

A well respected Scottish QC attending an event I was present at compared it to pleading with a bunch of company directors.

Turns out the ones in the case he mentioned seem to be exactly as he described them - something of relevance for your petition

Anonymous said...

• Creation of a new judicial post – the summary sheriff - to resolve lower value civil cases such as debt cases more swiftly and efficiently, while also dealing with summary criminal cases.

• Plans for specialist sheriffs and specialist summary sheriffs in areas of law such as family, housing, personal injury and commercial law, with the expertise to deal with these issues as swiftly as possible.

Brilliant.Just create another tier of judges to add to the already chaotic courts system and everything will be fine.

Who comes up with this garbage?

Anonymous said...

The legal insider commenting on Scottish courts and the small jurisdiction is very good.This is exactly how it is.

The introduction of this bill in the same year of the independence referendum indicates Mr Macaskill hoping for a Yes vote has aspirations to create an offshore justice system equivalent of the Cayman Islands within the EU?

If so the prudent step will be for EU leaders to refuse Scotland's entry into the EU to safeguard their own legal systems within Europe and prevent any Scottish contamination or takeover.

Anonymous said...

Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill

MacAskill, who was once a High Street solicitor went on to claim: “Our reforms will help us ensure that the right cases are heard in the right places - reducing delays, cost and bureaucracy. They will also offer clearer routes to justice and more specialisation for a range of cases, from personal injury cases to family law.”

Anyone daft enough to believe him?

Anonymous said...

"Who comes up with this garbage?"


What amazes me is why they publish this for the attention of the Scottish Public, when they do not have the slightest interest in what is right for them or indeed how the Scottish Public would like to see the Judicial System changed?


I will give you two suggestions that would get overwhelming support of the Scottish Public and would save the country money and increase the confidence in the Scottish Judicial System:-

1) Sack all of the Judges for not adhering to a Register of their Interests and replace them on half their salary with conscientious, principled Public Servant Judges who understand the meaning of Transparency and Accountability and how necessary these are to Justice?

2) Send the Police into the Law Society of Scotland to get some of their criminal Office Bearers jailed and then disband this unlawful organisation and then set up two alternative Society's to represent Scottish lawyers so that their is competition in the market place?

Anonymous said...

You are refreshingly honest in your commentaries on the legal industry.Obviously you are not a solicitor!

Anonymous said...

I am sure Lord Gill will welcome the new members of the judiciary created by this bill with open arms.

To be of any use there will have to be at least 10 (I suspect many more) Summary Sheriffs with a possible annual salary of £120K plus pension so this makes a basic £1.2million.

Specialist Sheriffs will require similar numbers so there is another £1million at least including all expenses and pensions etc

The Sheriff Appeal Court and the new national Personal Injury court will require possibly £3 million or more to set up and staff.

Need I go on?

Why is all this public cash being thrown at the courts when we are supposed to be trying to save money.

Are any journalists going to really question these so-called reforms or are we left to rely on you as usual?

Anonymous said...

We need a Justice Secretary who understands the meaning of the word and instead of patronising people to ask the clients who have had to use the Scottish Courts?
==================================
So true and the main reason I will vote no on 18th September. MacAskill stands for one word, domination. He is determined as are his lawyer colleagues to maintain this system of what amounts to legalized robbery of clients, recycled corrupt lawyers who should be in prison and secrecy from the paralegal to the Lord President's refusal to be subjected to a regiater of interests. If this is not enough to warn off the public I don't know what is. They are a bunch of criminals who claim to be a profession, no one can legally sue because they control who gets or does not get access to justice. No wonder people get ripped off again and again with this corrupt profitable client blocking setup.
MacAskill belongs in the Law Society of Scotland not a Parliament.

Anonymous said...

Scottish justice system is all about money and you can buy anyone including the judges.

cough cough

Times Online:
A billionaire Arab sheikh said that British law worked on “money not justice”, and vowed to “stitch up” an employee who dared to challenge him, an employment tribunal was told yesterday.

Sheikh Maher al-Tajir, whose family owns 24,000 acres (9,700ha) of land in Perthshire and the Highland Spring bottled water company, is alleged to have told Chris Mulqueeney that he had enough money to buy anything he wanted in Britain, including the police and the justiciary.

When the former head gamekeeper said that Britain wasn’t like that, the sheikh is said to have replied: “You’re so patriotic. Hasn’t anyone told you that the law of this great land works on money, not justice, and I’ve got enough money to buy any of them? The police, the justiciary — all have their price in this country.”

The claims came as Mr Mulqueeney, 48, who worked as Mr al-Tajir’s head gamekeeper after moving his family from Kent to Scotland in 2001, told an employment tribunal in Edinburgh that the sheikh launched a two-hour verbal assault on him during a meeting in September 2004.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Gill said "It costs deter litigants whose claims may be well-founded. Its procedures cause frustration and obstruct rather than facilitate the achievement of justice."
==================================
Gill wont change a thing it is in his interests not to do so. He has real power, and his Parliament. Care to vote anyone? The Legal Profession have MSP's by the balls.

Anonymous said...

Courts will never be reformed just like the NHS its always dying on its feet because someone is making money out of it

Anonymous said...

“London’s courts, internationally respected and much less problematic than Scotland will continue to have clear advantages over the Scots model which is after all based upon a small jurisdiction widely associated with excessive legal fees, inferior legal services, and mounting problems with its judiciary.”

Everyone knows this except those in Scotland who have to listen to all that garbage from MacAskill about Scots law being world envied etc

I can assure you the days of Scots law being envied have long past as countries found out for themselves it is a failure as the judge himself seems to admit.

Not much of a model for anyone to follow or admire.

Anonymous said...

Just watch and wait to see how the lawyers lobby for their own version of this so called reform when it goes into the parliament.

Lawyers always have the final say and they are not going to mess up their chance to take as much money from us as possible!

Anonymous said...

"Seven years on, Lord Gill’s Civil courts reforms head to Parliament as Scots face prospect of little change on access to poor quality, expensive & selective civil justice system"
==================================
Poor quality because there are no checks and balances, expensive because it is a lawyers monopoly, and selective because it is political. Lord Gill the lawyer is looking after lawyers. There is a surprise.

Anonymous said...

Yes Lord Gill you jam the courts because long drawn out cases are in you and your colleagues interest. Lawyers make money for nothing and are always cleared of wrecking clients lives.

Anonymous said...

Been reading through some of your previous on this so from what I understand now we are not getting any reforms lawyers and these judges dont want us to have.

Best thing for people to do is stay away from courts or lawyers and enjoy their lives instead.These people are misery merchants and live off sucking the blood out of people.

Thanks for the read!

Anonymous said...

Sheikh Maher al-Tajir has a good 'alleged' take on these Scottish judges and the justice system!Bravo!

Anonymous said...

From what you say about the Scottish courts it may well be easier,less expensive and afford Scots a fairer hearing if their cases were transferred to England rather than spend what is certain to be a lot of money on reforms that will not deliver on justice.

You also have a good point about the time wait on implementing these reforms.Seven years on is too long a wait for something which seems to be heralded at the time as a major speech and here we are seven years later with nothing to show for it.

Anonymous said...

He continued: “London’s courts, internationally respected and much less problematic than Scotland will continue to have clear advantages over the Scots model which is after all based upon a small jurisdiction widely associated with excessive legal fees, inferior legal services, and mounting problems with its judiciary.”

Sums up the situation perfectly.

I for one would not recommend anyone litigate in Scotland's courts.

Anonymous said...

MacAskill is a Trojan Horse for the Law Society of Scotland.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Been reading through some of your previous on this so from what I understand now we are not getting any reforms lawyers and these judges dont want us to have.

Best thing for people to do is stay away from courts or lawyers and enjoy their lives instead.These people are misery merchants and live off sucking the blood out of people.

Thanks for the read!

7 February 2014 23:32
()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()()(()(

Funny how after 7 years of NOTHING and then only now, when there is massive scandal of their own making, they come out with this old chestnut?

The Scottish Judicial System cannot be repaired, altered, renewed or spruced-up?

The reason being, it is the people within ithe Scottish Judicial System that are the problem?

Opposing a Register Of Scottish Judges Interests is simply not consistent with being a Scottish Judge?

In fact, Lord Gill has put his foot in it because he should never have been allowed to appear as though he was anti Transparency and anti Accountability?

He should have referred the matter to the Justice Minister, so that he made the decision, after all, that is why MacAskill is being paid by the Scottish Public?

Mind you, maybe the ball was passed perfectly into MacAskill's stride, only for him to boot it out of the stadium in a blind panic?

Scotland's rotten Judicial System has become a self-interested industry to serve its own workers with the Scottish Public being the unfortunate incumbrance to them, evidenced by the naked contempt shown to them at every part of the process?

Mr MacAskill & Lord Gill, when the patient has cancer riddling all of it's organs, you cannot expect to provide them with a cure by telling the patient to take an alka seltzer?

Anonymous said...

“The civil justice system in Scotland is a Victorian model that had survived by means of periodic piecemeal reforms. But in substance its structure and procedures are those of a century and a half ago. It is failing the litigant and it is failing society.

“It is essential that we should have a system that has disputes resolved at a judicial level that is appropriate to their degree of importance and that disputes should be dealt with expeditiously and efficiently and without unnecessary or unreasonable cost. That means that the judicial structure should be based on a proper hierarchy of courts and that the procedures should be appropriate to the nature and the importance of the case, in terms of time and cost. Scottish civil justice fails on all of these counts. Its delays are notorious. It costs deter litigants whose claims may be well-founded. Its procedures cause frustration and obstruct rather than facilitate the achievement of justice."
----------------------------------
Lord of the spin doctors. What has he done about it?

Anonymous said...

If the Scottish Judicial System is Victorian, then it is not going to be fixed by replacing a few light bulbs and door knobs?

I am afraid the Scottish Judicial System serves only Scottish lawyers and has become a cash-cow for Scottish lawyers who greedily squabble over who gets to suck on the teet first to drain the supply?

This was expertly exposed by the BBC in their programme of corruption with regard to the Scottish Legal Aid Fund, which is seen by Scottish crooked lawyers as their yearly brand new Mercedes Fund?

Anonymous said...

I have a case stuck in the court of session and none of this will make a blind bit of difference solely because it is in the lawyers best interests to string me along as much as possible.4 years lord Gill and your colleagues in the judiciary have just sat back and smiled each time we appear knowing all the fees are being charged to me and your court costs and everything else.

Anonymous said...

Best thing for people to do is stay away from courts or lawyers and enjoy their lives instead.................I agree stay away from the as far as possible, they are life destroyers, the vilest profession in Scotland.

Anonymous said...

You have mentioned transcripts and their cost.

In an action for damages before the Court of Session I have asked my solicitor several times to obtain transcripts of a hearing where the lady judge was openly hostile towards our expert witnesses while allowing the defenders to drone on as my own QC put it for hours answering meaningless questions.Each remark my solicitor wrote down from the judge including one under her breath expletive was not mentioned in two full copies of transcripts of hearings costing me around £2,500.Remember the notes of what the judge said were also taken by my own solicitor who has no cause to make it up.Anyway to cut a long story short I told my solicitor to complain and the Law Society ordered him to withdraw from acting for me.He refused the defenders approached us and we worked out an out of court settlement with the defenders wanting to keep me quiet.I did not sign their non disclosure statement.Did receive a settlement with defenders paying about 90% of my legal costs.I am trying to scan some of the papers and will contact you when ready also my solicitor is keen to speak to you and it was he who pointed me in the direction of your blog.He will probably note this comment and contact me so please publish what I have written.

Anonymous said...

Why so long since he said all this and nothing done?

Diary of Injustice said...

@ 8 February 2014 13:03

Good points.

It is of immense benefit Lord Gill was as outspoken as he was at the time in 2009 regarding failures in the Civil Courts system and access to justice. However little has been said over the years since, unless the good Lord wishes to take a stand when the Courts Reform Bill goes to the Scottish Parliament ... and give msps a true and accurate picture of the obvious difficulties Scots face in our own courts, rather than simply a presentation on behalf of vested legal interests.

The problem is here we are in 2014 and legislation now being presented to the Scottish Parliament will face the wrath of vested interests such as the Law Society and Faculty of Advocates in terms of just how easy it can be made for ordinary people to plead their own cases in court or access mediation services without having to resort to the inevitable use of costly legal services provided by the legal profession.

Who will win in such a contest is in little doubt as the interests of big business and a self sustaining legal industry far outweigh the problems of ordinary people who have little ability to compete with the lobbying power of the Law Society's £1bn plus closed shop legal industry.

However there will be a consultation and the public should make their points in representations to the Justice Committee when the opportunity is allowed later this year, if only to demonstrate again the inequalities Scots must face when attempting to access justice in our own country.

@ 9 February 2014 21:35

Thanks for your comment.If your solicitor wishes to contact DOI please ensure they have your permission to do so and please email more details of your case to scottishlawreporters@gmail.com

Anonymous said...

Very good.Lord Gill should give that speech and some case examples to the msps as you say and also tell them why it has taken the 7 years to do something about it when he said all that stuff at the time about justice failing society.

Just imagine how many people have not been able to get justice in the last 7 years because of what the judge said and nothing done about it until now.

Anonymous said...

lol

you cant half rip the guts out of these so called legal reforms!All those lawyers involved in that Press release from Scottish Government to make it sound like a giant leap forward and then you come on and give the goods on reality of it all.

Also correct about the money angle and it not being in their favor to change things too much so people stop using lawyers and start using their own heads.

Anonymous said...

"However little has been said over the years since, unless the good Lord wishes to take a stand when the Courts Reform Bill goes to the Scottish Parliament ... and give msps a true and accurate picture of the obvious difficulties Scots face in our own courts, rather than simply a presentation on behalf of vested legal interests."

In answer to what you said I just have to quote the newspaper headline "Good Lord,No!"

Anyway you are spot on.Gill has to show up and defend if not go on the offensive for his reforms and tell the msps just why it has taken from 2009 to now to get to this stage and why something that was "Victorian" in 2009 is just flogging a dead horse in 2014!

Anonymous said...

Judging by how badly claims of £150K or so are currently treated in the Court of Session I'd say it is even more dangerous to move claims of this size to the Sheriff courts because if anything the Sheriffs are more closely allied to law firms than the judges in the Court of Session (although I am sure you are going to correct me on this point)

Anonymous said...

With such effective responses it is clear why the Law Society feel you must be kept away from the parliament.Too big a threat to the status quo and the lawyers money making machine in the courts.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
I have a case stuck in the court of session and none of this will make a blind bit of difference solely because it is in the lawyers best interests to string me along as much as possible.4 years lord Gill and your colleagues in the judiciary have just sat back and smiled each time we appear knowing all the fees are being charged to me and your court costs and everything else.

9 February 2014 18:57
------------------------

My case has been stuck too since 2010 because it suits them to keep it stuck?

Dozens of excuses and passing of the buck later and another £100,000 grand gets added to the bill?

It's almost as if when your case starts they turn over a sand glass and each grain of sand that falls through is a £20 note and you have to sit there and watch this while they all sit there silently grinning at you because you have been foolish enough to use THEIR system?

Anonymous said...

It has often fascinated me as to why in a Scottish Court the witnesses have to swear on the bible?

Why?

When the Scottish Judges & Sheriff's can act in an unchristian way without fear of being reported, where their conduct contradicts the witness' obeying of an oath?

Or, is the reason that they are not worried about being reported because Lord Gill has their backs?