tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post8149580815379445153..comments2024-03-24T23:01:57.640+00:00Comments on The Justice Diaries: CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Papers lodged at Holyrood judicial interests register probe reveal Court of Session judge heard case eight times - where his son acted as solicitor for the defendersUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-72696144218681496082017-05-29T11:24:38.022+01:002017-05-29T11:24:38.022+01:00@ 29 May 2017 at 08:49
Thanks, interesting choic...@ 29 May 2017 at 08:49 <br /><br />Thanks, interesting choice of judge given the case ... will look into this thanks.<br /><br />@ 29 May 2017 at 09:20 & 09:25<br /><br />Noted.Good detail in the National story, thanks ...Diary of Injusticehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00697476580161690118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-12238541920034364152017-05-29T09:25:45.727+01:002017-05-29T09:25:45.727+01:00http://www.thenational.scot/news/15314689.Call_for...http://www.thenational.scot/news/15314689.Call_for_code_of_conduct_review_after_solicitor_switches_sides/<br /><br />Call for code of conduct review after solicitor switches sides<br />Martin Hannan Journalist 28 May 2017<br /><br />A HIGH Court judge has called on the Law Society of Scotland and other legal professional bodies to “reflect” on their codes of conduct after a case in which a lawyer represented a client only for his firm to be merged into a new large legal company that represented the other side.<br /><br />In a dissenting judgment, Lord Malcolm disagreed with Lords Bracadale and McGhie in the case of Ecclesiastical Insurance Plc against Lady Iam Hazel Virginia Whitehouse-Grant-Christ.<br /><br />She had formally objected on grounds of confidentiality to the law firm BLM representing Ecclesiastical at a previous court hearing in the long-running case, which concerns an insurance claim following a fire that destroyed Whitehouse-Grant-Christ’s art gallery in a converted church in Banffshire in 2000.<br /><br />Whitehouse-Grant-Christ’s first solicitor on the case was George Moore, now a QC, who had then worked with HBM Sayers, and with whom she dealt for six weeks. HBM Sayers merged with Berrymanss Lace Mawer in 2014 to form BLM, the firm that took over representing Ecclesiastical Insurance last year.<br /><br />It was stated in court that Moore continues to work as a consultant for BLM, and the bench of three judges at the Court of Session split two to one in favour of BLM being allowed to continue to represent the insurer.<br /><br />Lord Malcolm stated in his minority opinion: “The question posed in this application is as follows — can a firm of solicitors act for a party in a litigation, and then, that retainer having ended, at a subsequent stage accept instructions from the former client’s opponent in the same proceedings?<br /><br />“All the judges who have had any involvement have entertained immediate concerns. Intuitively, it seems wrong. While not excluding the exceptional case, for my part I am of the view that it would be a sound general rule if a firm of solicitors, having acted on one side of a litigation, was disabled from thereafter changing sides. I would apply such a rule to the present case.”<br /><br />He added: “I would expect any litigant to be unhappy if a firm of solicitors who had formerly acted for them, at a later stage of the same proceedings advised and represented the other side; and this no matter that a court was persuaded that there was no real risk of a disclosure of confidential information.<br /><br />“In such circumstances, no amount of assurances or undertakings are likely to satisfy the former client, who might well, especially if ultimately unsuccessful, harbour suspicions and a grievance, and form a poor impression as to the fairness and integrity of the judicial and regulatory processes.”<br /><br />Lord Malcolm concluded: “Whatever else, this case may prompt the professional bodies to reflect on their codes of conduct.”<br /><br />full opinion here if you want to read up http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=1a6434a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7<br /><br />You can see the point about Malcolm (Colin Campbell QC) here supposedly concerns about conflict of interest he did not bother to communicate in this case you write about!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-65814374009879087902017-05-29T09:20:37.231+01:002017-05-29T09:20:37.231+01:00Lord Malcolm takes out the SLCC complaints system ...Lord Malcolm takes out the SLCC complaints system then in the second story the same Lord Malcolm tries to balance it up with some duff comments in a case involving a lawyer who switched sides.Clearly a lot of dirty deals going on in the judiciary and their supporters/recruits in the legal profession<br /><br />SLCC "disappointed" at court ruling against hybrid complaints<br /><br />The longstanding practice of treating certain complaints against legal practitioners as "hybrid" – capable of being treated as raising issues of both inadequate professional service and professional misconduct – has been ruled improper by the Inner House of the Court of Session.<br /><br />The complaint had previously been appealed twice (by the complainer) and was then appealed by the law firm complained about. The SLCC had determined that three of the issues within the complaint were hybrid, but the judges ruuled that two of the issues concerned service only and the remaining issue purely conduct. Further, Lord Malcolm, delivering the opinion of the court, in which he sat with Lord Justice Clerk Lady Dorrian and Lady Clark of Calton, held that complaint issues in general could not be classified as hybrid.<br /><br />Referring to an earlier case in which the propriety of hybrid complaints was raised but not decided, Lord Malcolm commented: "However, in Bartos, the result was that the Faculty, after investigation, held that counsel did not mislead the court, while the Commission, after a separate investigation, reached the view that he had. The Commission’s decision was described as a finding of inadequate professional services, but clearly it was also a finding of at least unsatisfactory professional conduct. It could not reasonably be seen as anything else, the Commission having already sent the allegation to the Faculty on the basis that it raised a matter concerning conduct. This exemplifies the problematic consequences when a complaint which raises one sharp issue of alleged fact is sent down both the conduct and services tracks."<br /><br />He added: "It would seem undesirable to have separate inquiries by different bodies into (a) whether there was a conflict of interest, and (b) the impact it had on the quality of the service provided, especially since the latter could be relevant to the proper sanction for any finding of misconduct. In short we are of the opinion that if a complaint, or a part of a complaint, suggests a failure in proper professional conduct, a view taken by the Commission that it could also be seen as raising a services issue does not justify the course taken in Bartos. Instead the Commission must decide whether to classify it as a conduct or a services complaint. The real mischief, which may need addressing, is the disparity between the compensation powers available to, on the one hand the professional organisations, and, on the other hand, to the Commission.<br /><br />SLCC chief executive Neil Stevenson expressed his disappointment in the decision: “However, the categorisation of whether a complaint is either conduct, service, or both is not just an academic one.While the clarity the opinion brings is welcome, this decision could have a huge impact on our process and, unfortunately, our ability to provide swift redress to those who bring a valid complaint. We will continue to study the judgment and work closely with others to ensure that legal consumers don’t lose out. Once the judgment has been fully considered, we will communicate with the profession and public further about current cases."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-83001131911359550912017-05-29T08:49:57.788+01:002017-05-29T08:49:57.788+01:00same Lord Malcolm?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/n...same Lord Malcolm?<br /><br />http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/ex-boxing-bigshot-barry-hughes-10489490<br /><br />Ex-boxing bigshot Barry Hughes appeals proceeds of crime rap forcing him to surrender £53k luxury goods haul<br /><br />ByAlan McEwen 12:57, 24 MAY 2017Updated21:00, 25 MAY 2017<br /><br />Convicted fraudster Barry Hughes is appealing against a £53,000 order forcing him to surrender a cache of luxury items.<br /><br />The shamed former boxing promoter wants to keep his hands on goods including Rolex watches and a mobile phone worth £5600.<br /><br />Hughes was slapped with the confiscation order by a sheriff as part of a dirty money probe.<br /><br />The 39-year-old appeared at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh today to contest the move, which he argues was unjust.<br /><br />His lawyer, Gordon Jackson QC, and prosecutors agreed to make written submissions in the case.<br /><br />Judge Lord Malcolm set the hearing for August in Glasgow ’s appeal court.<br /><br />Hughes was ordered to pay up in February as a complex £6 million proceeds of crime action against him was due to get under way.<br /><br />It was expected to last up to 150 days, but Hughes’ legal team withdrew after a sheriff refused an adjournment.<br /><br />Hughes, who was left representing himself, elected not to give evidence at Glasgow Sheriff Court.<br /><br />Prosecutor Blair Speed invited Sheriff Paul Crozier to make a confiscation order for £53,412.21 of realisable assets.<br /><br />Sheriff Crozier granted the order, allowing six months for the dad-of-five to stump up. The court had heard the “benefit figure” from Hughes’ crimes was £5,394,202.49.<br /><br />The order for the lesser amount allows prosecutors to try to seize more from Hughes in the future.<br /><br />Hughes’ realisable assets included a £5600 Vertu Constellation Pure Collection mobile phone, a Rolex Gent’s Daytona Cosmograph Oyster watch valued at £6170, a Rolex Gent’s Daytona Cosmograph Black Dial watch worth £6310, a Cartier Gent’s Quartz Santos watch valued at £2200, and a Cartier Gent’s Stainless Steel Automatic Santos 100 watch valued at £3250.<br /><br />Hughes, who lives in the Glasgow area, had offered to repay £500,000 to bring the matter “to a complete end”.<br /><br />The businessman was jailed in March 2014 for 43 months over mortgage frauds worth nearly £1.3m. but his sentence was later overturned and he was fined £45,000.<br /><br />He claimed his wife Jacqueline made £160,000 from her business McDonald Interiors - but divorce papers lodged by her in 2006 stated that she was “financially dependent” on her husband.<br /><br />Hughes lied about his wife’s income on mortgage applications in 2004 for a property in Bridge of Weir and in 2006 for a second in Kilmacolm, both in Renfrewshire.<br /><br />He admitted laundering money by receiving £128,885 after selling the first property and spending £30,000 towards a Rolex watch.<br /><br />Hughes went bankrupt in December 2014 with a tax debt totalling £10m.<br /><br />Following his mortgage fraud conviction, we revealed how Hughes carried £15,000 in dirty money in a Sugar Puffs cereal box as part of a money-laundering operation.<br /><br />Hughes turned up in a flashy motor to buy a £148,000 fleet of Skoda cars on behalf of gangsters Russell Stirton and Alexander Anderson.<br /><br />During a proceeds of crime case against Stirton and the estate of Anderson, who died in 2012, a judge detailed how the Skodas Hughes bought from a Glasgow dealer were sold on to taxi firm Spring Radio Cars - for approximately twice the normal retail price.<br /><br />Lady Stacey said it had “the air of a money laundering exercise” and she believed evidence from tax officials who said they were told the taxi firm was paying protection money.<br /><br />Hughes, who has convictions for carrying a knife and for assault, is known for his love of top-range cars, including Rolls Royces, Lamborghinis and Bentleys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-52362118221689971282017-03-19T19:11:30.520+00:002017-03-19T19:11:30.520+00:00The petition is probably regarded as the thin end ...The petition is probably regarded as the thin end of the wedge by the judiciary - hence the dogged obstruction and delaying tactics. Whatever next I hear them muttering, mandatory recording of civil claims - with copies made available to all parties - television cameras in the Courts!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-42882483544208117332017-03-18T20:39:05.353+00:002017-03-18T20:39:05.353+00:00This a story which I suspect will run and run........This a story which I suspect will run and run...........good work!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-89294610071421394812017-03-11T19:14:49.068+00:002017-03-11T19:14:49.068+00:00Another revelatory report from DOI - great to have...Another revelatory report from DOI - great to have you back!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-12492622724321134612017-03-08T19:24:52.335+00:002017-03-08T19:24:52.335+00:00In answer to the person who said litigation prefer...In answer to the person who said litigation prefers the London courts did you bother to read the following? "the blocking of an appeal to the UK Supreme Court by Lord Hodge – who failed to declare he previously sat on the Nolan v Advance Construction Ltd case at least eighteen times while he served as a judge in the Court of Session."<br /><br />How exactly does Lord Hodge blocking a case he previously heard in Edinburgh 18 times and failing to mention anything about it fit in with Professor Paterson's shaky moments of the UK Supreme Court! Hoffman x 18! <br /><br />No wonder they dont want a register of interests or any details published about their non recusals!<br /><br />Doesn't say much for the UK Supreme Court does it when a Scottish judge who sits on a case all those times then stops an appeal going ahead in London not that it will make much difference anyway because from the sounds of it the judiciary had the whole case worked out in advance before it was ever heard for proof.<br /><br />And I for one did not miss the point you made in your article about the action being moved from Hamilton Sheriff Court to the CoS for a "speedy resolution". <br /><br />Since when has CoS offered anyone a speedy resolution unless there is some pressing need by the legal establishment to cover up scandal for one of their own characters!<br /><br />The investigation should start with the Hamilton Sheriff Court.They may put out a lot of blurb about amounts and the claim but this is where the skulduggery started from whoever wanted it into the CoS to be played along to their own tune.Given some of the names and law firms you mention I doubt there are any prizes for guessing who was behind this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-32549079086683866082017-03-08T18:11:58.181+00:002017-03-08T18:11:58.181+00:00The Scottish legal establishment is corrupt from t...The Scottish legal establishment is corrupt from top to bottom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-59489103743776511922017-03-08T17:00:21.397+00:002017-03-08T17:00:21.397+00:00From now on there should also be a rule put in pla...From now on there should also be a rule put in place no children of judges are made a judge.This way you cut out all these dynasties in the legal world and sons/daughters ruling on cases where their parents have sent people to jail or whatever.Legal dynasties are as toxic to justice as political dynasties are toxic to democracy.<br /><br />----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />The thing is where do you stop? A master carpenter's son wants to be a joiner so he gets a job with his dad at the same firm, the same can be said for a plumbers son and a car mechanic son & so on.<br /><br />What happened to me with the judiciary was disgusting and if you really want to sort this out, you first of all close Holyrood & sack all those useless bastards that do nothing for anyone, nothing. I have dealt with six of them in the past & they are all big LSS & SLCC supporters.<br /><br />Afterwards you sack the whole complete judiciary, and seek judicial services from another country with no ties because thats how it all works, clerks got stuff on the judges, judges have stuff on clerks and so on.<br /><br />This is the only way forward.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-67227583317010502452017-03-08T13:45:24.785+00:002017-03-08T13:45:24.785+00:00@ 4 March 2017 at 15:57
From now on there should...@ 4 March 2017 at 15:57 <br /><br /><b>From now on there should also be a rule put in place no children of judges are made a judge.This way you cut out all these dynasties in the legal world and sons/daughters ruling on cases where their parents have sent people to jail or whatever.Legal dynasties are as toxic to justice as political dynasties are toxic to democracy.</b><br /><br />A good suggestion for tackling the well known problem of diversity in Scotland's 'small' judiciary ...<br /><br />It may also be worth bearing in mind Scotland's 'small' yet powerful judiciary numbering around 700 or so members, is many times the size of the number of MSPs (129) in the Scottish Parliament, who like many others in public life are required to declare their interests.Diary of Injusticehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00697476580161690118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-78037441626148183022017-03-07T22:02:51.194+00:002017-03-07T22:02:51.194+00:00I wouldn't bother going to the Court of Sessio...I wouldn't bother going to the Court of Session for anything.Well known you get ripped off at the front door and lose your life going out the back door.<br /><br />And it has not escaped my attention Scots Law is internationally known as a major con.<br /><br />One of the reasons international litigation prefer the London courts and a more fearless press in England who take on judges when cases get out of hand such as this latest you wrote about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-28890113266831697862017-03-06T19:45:09.007+00:002017-03-06T19:45:09.007+00:00A blind man on a dark night could soon see the ver...A blind man on a dark night could soon see the very pressing need for your petition to made law................NOW!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-91777628537469965702017-03-04T20:32:20.486+00:002017-03-04T20:32:20.486+00:00"From now on there should also be a rule put ..."From now on there should also be a rule put in place no children of judges are made a judge.This way you cut out all these dynasties in the legal world and sons/daughters ruling on cases where their parents have sent people to jail or whatever.Legal dynasties are as toxic to justice as political dynasties are toxic to democracy."<br /><br />Best comment for awhile and should be made into law.This situation where next of kin follow their parents onto the bench is out of step with what people refer to as a "modern democracy".<br /><br />Same can be said of politicians however we have the chance to vote them in or out.<br /><br />However, this is not so with the judiciary who grant their own a seat on the bench for generation after generation adding in a quick name change so everyone is none the wiser.<br /><br />You should add this to your petition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-16108401186746801982017-03-04T15:57:58.024+00:002017-03-04T15:57:58.024+00:00Little point in spending zillions going to the Cou...Little point in spending zillions going to the Court of Session expecting to be heard when the entire procedure is stage managed between parents and relatives shielded by Brian Gill's hard working clerks..How often is this occurring and why is the only other example referred to as Lord Gill standing aside when his son shows up in court.Everyone knows most of the judges have children and relatives in the legal profession so this has to be occurring much more frequently than Lord Malcolm and Lord Gill.<br /><br />From now on there should also be a rule put in place no children of judges are made a judge.This way you cut out all these dynasties in the legal world and sons/daughters ruling on cases where their parents have sent people to jail or whatever.Legal dynasties are as toxic to justice as political dynasties are toxic to democracy.<br /><br />btw good work on the story,at least someone is attentive!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-6535207808208918792017-03-02T19:52:45.919+00:002017-03-02T19:52:45.919+00:00If Malcolm had resigned/recused/whatever on 3 May ...If Malcolm had resigned/recused/whatever on 3 May 2012 another judge could have taken over the case.So because this did not happen someone's interests were well served and now the question has to be asked who's interests were served,certainly not the pursuer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-65929967505289892112017-03-02T19:35:02.005+00:002017-03-02T19:35:02.005+00:00What happens now?Surely the committee must now ord...What happens now?Surely the committee must now order a full investigation into the judiciary and Mr Nolan finally get some justice instead of having to sit by while all the lawyers line their pockets courtesy of the judiciary!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-87718863404836989632017-03-02T11:54:33.274+00:002017-03-02T11:54:33.274+00:00Going by the dates all this was happening while Gi...Going by the dates all this was happening while Gill was trying to avoid appearing in front of msps and your petition..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-68733684588911069172017-03-02T02:38:36.949+00:002017-03-02T02:38:36.949+00:00Pinochet got better justice from house of lords.
L...Pinochet got better justice from house of lords.<br />Lord Hoffman was not impatial or independent because he had links to Amnesty who opposed Pinochet.<br />Surely father son relationships are less independent.<br />No-one will convince me this father and son did not have private conversations about this case over dinner or that the father never gave the son advice of how to proceed in front of him in court.Big Wullie Beckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14622020677322097844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-18952053392593178712017-03-02T02:11:59.762+00:002017-03-02T02:11:59.762+00:00The decision ought to be set aside3 with reference...The decision ought to be set aside3 with reference to Hoekstra and Pinochet.<br />I also believe that the UK Parliament ought to be made aware of these multiple infractions by the Scottish courts who refuse to act to rectify these corrupt decisions<br />Big Wullie Beckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14622020677322097844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-30865912296433369322017-03-02T01:34:50.008+00:002017-03-02T01:34:50.008+00:00They are all filling their families pockets with l...They are all filling their families pockets with loads of cash at our expenses.<br />Independent and Impartial do not feature in Scots law.Big Wullie Beckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14622020677322097844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-86427654248802654942017-03-01T23:34:25.128+00:002017-03-01T23:34:25.128+00:00How does a judge manage to get away hearing a case...How does a judge manage to get away hearing a case 8 times when his son was around in the court at the same time!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-10381349407472953452017-03-01T23:03:51.967+00:002017-03-01T23:03:51.967+00:00Donal Nolan the jockey?Watched him race many times...Donal Nolan the jockey?Watched him race many times!<br />Very sad to see such a great guy treated so badly by the justice system.<br />Best wishes to Donal and hope this is put right for him soon.<br /><br />AlanRnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-38176117398938910312017-03-01T21:13:28.980+00:002017-03-01T21:13:28.980+00:00Pleadings to the court reveal Lord Malcolm heard t...Pleadings to the court reveal Lord Malcolm heard the case on eight separate occasions, listed as 3 May 2012, 11 May 2012, 24 July 2012, 4 October 2012, 13 March 2013, 11 April 2013, 20 May 2013 and on 16 March 2016.<br /><br />However, there is no record of any recusal by Lord Malcolm in the case.<br /><br />So much for declaring their interests as Gill said they do<br /><br />Long past time we had your register of interest for the judges.Tell the msps to get on with it now we have this out in the open!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20722989.post-75294052701324714752017-03-01T20:38:24.475+00:002017-03-01T20:38:24.475+00:00is there anyone left who really believes you can o...is there anyone left who really believes you can obtain justice at the court of session?<br />just a court of crooks if you ask me!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com