RECUSAL REGISTER: Senators, Judges, Sheriffs & Tribunal members now declare more recusal detail in Conflict of Interest Register – as Holyrood Justice Committee probe petition to create a Register of Judges' Interests

Judges’ conflicts of interest declared. SCOTLAND’S judiciary leads the rest of the United Kingdom in one area of transparency – the publication of Judicial ‘Recusals’ – the term used to describe when a judge or tribunal member has a conflict of interest and must stand aside from hearing a case.

Currently, around one hundred and seventy five recusals of judges and tribunal members have been recorded in the Register of Recusals – which is kept up to date by the Judiciary of Scotland here: Judicial Recusals - Judiciary of Scotland

The Register of Recusals came into being - albeit grudgingly – after Scotland’s now former top judge Lord Brian Gill - held an unprecedented private meeting with Committee Conveners during early 2014.

Gill created the Register of Recusals - as a response to growing calls for MSPs to press ahead with a petition calling for all judges to declare their interests in a publicly available register - Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary.

However, later in the same year, top judge Lord Brian Gill was forced to recuse himself from a case in which his own son – Advocate Brian Gill – represented one of the parties involved in an action – the details of which, and identities of the parties involved, were kept secret from media enquiries at the time in 2014.

Only recently, with again – grudging reforms to the Recusals Register, enacted only after requests from MSPs and direct discussions between the Judicial Interests petitioner and the Judicial Office itself, do we now know the identities of litigants, case references and extra details now published in the Recusals Register.

Whatever was so secret about publishing the fact the Lord President’s son represented a party in Belhaven Brewery v Assessor for Ayrshire XA 72/14 – causing the recusal of his father Lord Brian Gill from the bench, is still to be adequately explained – but we now know who were involved, just – not the ‘why’.

However, despite recent promises from the Judicial Office that Justices of the Peace – numbering well over 400 - were to be included in the Regster of Recisals – there are, strangely and without explanation, no references whatsoever to one single Justice of the Peace being the subject of a recusal.

Furthermore when enquiries were made of the Judicial Office to reveal more detailsof the JPs, all communications from the Head of Governance stopped after it was queried why no JPs had recused – sparking another mystery to be solved.

The lack of recusals in relation to Justices of the Peace was reported in more detail here : THE UNRECUSED: Mystery as 450 Justices of the Peace fail to register one single recusal in a full year after conflict of interest rules change for Scotland’s secretive army of lay magistrates

Additionally – and worryingly for those who prefer honesty with their judiciary – there is not a single mention of any of the judges who were forced to stand aside in the hearings relating to a multi million pound damages claim against the Lord Advocate and Scotland’s Chief Constable - A295/16 David Whitehouse (represented by Urquharts) v Liam Murphy &c (represented by Ledingham Chambers for SGLD - Scottish Government Legal Directorate)

The case related to legal action taken by former Rangers Administrator David Whitehouse - for wrongful arrest and financial damages against Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC and the Chief Constable of Police Scotland.

A media investigation revelaed the case was incredibly scheduled to be heard by the Lord Advocate’s wife – Lady Sarah Wolffe - who is a judge in the Court of Session.

The case was reported in more detail here: WOLFFE COURT: Lord Advocate James Wolffe and his judge wife at centre of £9million damages claim - Questions remain why Lady Wolffe avoided recusal during emergency judge swap on court case against her own husband

It then emerged a series of judge swapping on the case, saw hearings passed from Lady Sarah Wolffe, to Lady Morag Wise, then Lord Paul Arthurson – and then to a FOURTH judge – Lord Sidney Neil Brailsford.

Yet, despite the blatant conflicts of interest in relation to the Lord Advocate’s own wife who was set to hear the case – there is – importantly – not one mention or reference, even a backdated note, within the Register of Recusals – to explain why, eventually – Lady Wolffe had to step aside from the case yet failed to issue a proper recusal for doing so.

Bizarrely, the case ultimately fell to be heard by Lord Malcolm – made famous after the judge – who’s real name is Colin Campbell QC – heard a case up to eight times where his son represented the defenders - yet saying nothing in court.

Another case which revealed significant problems with how the Judicial Office kept records of judicial recusals was that of an instance involving Lord Bracadale – where, only after media enquiries to the Judicial Office Press Chief, was it admitted a case in which Lord Bracadale had stepped aside from hearing, was not recorded in the Register of  Recusals.

After admitting the ‘mistake’ of failing to record the recusal by Lord Bracadale, clerks for the Scottish Courts & Tribunals Service then silently updated the Recusals Register, a year later, and without any note that the recusal had been amended after the ‘mistake’ had been investigated by the media.

The Bracadale recusal issue was reported in greater detail here: RECUSALS UNLIMITED: Doubts over credibility of register of judges’ recusals - as Judicial Office admit court clerks failed to add details of senior judges recusals – then silently altered records a year later.

It is worth noting, Lord Carloway was asked questions about the failure to record Lord Bracadale’s recusal, during the Lord President’s evidence hearing with the Public Petitions Committee in July 2017.

Lord Carloway’s could not offer a satisfactory response, and it is worth noting the Head of Judicial Communications resigned her post during queries into why the Bracadale recusal had been concealed from the publicly available Register of Recusals.

The Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee are currently investigating calls for a probe of Judicial Recusals, as part of their work on considering Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary.

The proposal, first debated at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in January 2013 – calls for the creation of a publicly available register of judicial interests – containing information on judges’ backgrounds, figures relating to personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, membership of organisations, property and land, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world.

Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations including reports from the media, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee and Justice Committee work in  relation to creating a Register of Judges’ Interests - can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary.

The current list of Judicial Recusals as of the date of publication of this article lists the following members of thejudiciary, court locations, case references, and reaons for their recusal due to a conflict of interest:

Judicial Recusals 2014

DATE	COURT & TYPE OF ACTION	JUDGE	CASE NAME & REF	MOTION BY & REASON
24/03/2014	Livingston Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Edington	A v B*	Defender; Sheriff drew to the parties’ attention a possible difficulty, namely the wife of one of the other resident Sheriffs was the author of a report contained with the proces s . T h e Sheriff asked parties if they wished him to recuse himself. The defenders, having considered the issue, made a motion for the Sheriff to recuse himself, which he then did.
08/04/2014	Forfar Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Veal	PF v Richard Hughes SCS/2013/148273	Ex proprio motu**; Sheriff personally known to a witness
10/04/2014	Selkirk Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Paterson	MacDonald v Dickson PBL A11/13	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had acted for a client in a previous dispute against the Pursuer

23/04/2014	High Court of Justiciary (Appeal)	Lady Wise	Barry Hughes v Her Majesty’s Advocate H CA/2014-001480- XC	Ex proprio motu; Senator had previously acted for a relative of accused
16/04/2014	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Cathcart	HMA v Michael J J Houston GLW 2013/013251; GLW2013/015913; GLW 2014/003566	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to the a witness
13/04/2014	Haddington Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Braid	C v D*	Ex p rop rio motu; Sheriff known to pursuer's family
14/05/2014	High Court of Justiciary (Criminal)	Temporary Judge MacIver	Mateusz Zborowski v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh HCA/2014­002089/XT	Ex proprio motu; Conflict of interest
20/05/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Matthews	E v F*	Ex p ro p ri o motu; Senator personally known to a witness
19/06/2014	Dingwall Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff N McPartlin	PF v Carl J Wheatley SCS/2013-110134	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff presided over a trial involving the accused, where the issue to which the instant case relates was spoken to by a witness

20/06/2014	Elgin Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Raeburn QC	PF Elgin v Alistair Simpson SCS/2014-011055	Ex proprio motu; Accused appeared before the Sheriff as a wi tn e ss in a recent trial relating to the same incident.
24/06/2014	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff P V Crozier	HMA v Paul Daniels GLW 2014 - 007144	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to proprietor of premises libelled in the charge.
26/06/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Gill	Belhaven Brewery v Assessor for Ayrshire XA 72/14	Ex proprio motu; Relative of Senator acts for the respondent
27/08/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Brailsford	G v H*	Ex proprio motu; Senator personally known to husband of th e p u rs u e r
28/08/2014	Oban Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff W D Small	Etonella Christlieb A22/14 & A23/14	Ex p ro p ri o m otu ; S heriff personally known to a party.
28/08/2014	Oban Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff W D Small	PF v Etonella Christlieb OBN2014-000138	Ex proprio motu; Personally known to a party of the action

22/10/2014	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Cowan	PF v George Mutch SCS/2013/-110352	Defender; Sheriff drew to parties’ attention that she was a member of the RSPB before commencement of a trial as the case involved an investigation carried out by the RSPB and many witnesses were RSPB officers. She invited parties to consider whether she should take the trial. The defenders, having considered the issue, made a motion for the Sheriff to recuse herself, which she then did.
08/12/2014	Alloa Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff D Mackie	I v J*	Ex proprio motu; Contemporaneous and overlapping proceedings comprising an appeal and a referral from the children’s hearing relating to children from the same family.
16/12/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lady Clark of Calton	Petition: Thomas Orr & another for Order Under Companies Act P1769/08	Ex proprio motu; Senator personally known to parties of the action.

Judicial Recusals 2014

DATE	COURT & TYPE OF ACTION	JUDGE	CASE NAME & REF	MOTION BY & REASON
24/03/2014	Livingston Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Edington	A v B*	Defender; Sheriff drew to the parties’ attention a possible difficulty, namely the wife of one of the other resident Sheriffs was the author of a report contained with the proces s . T h e Sheriff asked parties if they wished him to recuse himself. The defenders, having considered the issue, made a motion for the Sheriff to recuse himself, which he then did.
08/04/2014	Forfar Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Veal	PF v Richard Hughes SCS/2013/148273	Ex proprio motu**; Sheriff personally known to a witness
10/04/2014	Selkirk Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Paterson	MacDonald v Dickson PBL A11/13	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had acted for a client in a previous dispute against the Pursuer

23/04/2014	High Court of Justiciary (Appeal)	Lady Wise	Barry Hughes v Her Majesty’s Advocate H CA/2014-001480- XC	Ex proprio motu; Senator had previously acted for a relative of accused
16/04/2014	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Cathcart	HMA v Michael J J Houston GLW 2013/013251; GLW2013/015913; GLW 2014/003566	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to the a witness
13/04/2014	Haddington Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Braid	C v D*	Ex p rop rio motu; Sheriff known to pursuer's family
14/05/2014	High Court of Justiciary (Criminal)	Temporary Judge MacIver	Mateusz Zborowski v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh HCA/2014­002089/XT	Ex proprio motu; Conflict of interest
20/05/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Matthews	E v F*	Ex p ro p ri o motu; Senator personally known to a witness
19/06/2014	Dingwall Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff N McPartlin	PF v Carl J Wheatley SCS/2013-110134	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff presided over a trial involving the accused, where the issue to which the instant case relates was spoken to by a witness

20/06/2014	Elgin Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Raeburn QC	PF Elgin v Alistair Simpson SCS/2014-011055	Ex proprio motu; Accused appeared before the Sheriff as a wi tn e ss in a recent trial relating to the same incident.
24/06/2014	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff P V Crozier	HMA v Paul Daniels GLW 2014 - 007144	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to proprietor of premises libelled in the charge.
26/06/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Gill	Belhaven Brewery v Assessor for Ayrshire XA 72/14	Ex proprio motu; Relative of Senator acts for the respondent
27/08/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lo rd Brailsford	G v H*	Ex proprio motu; Senator personally known to husband of th e p u rs u e r
28/08/2014	Oban Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff W D Small	Etonella Christlieb A22/14 & A23/14	Ex p ro p ri o m otu ; S heriff personally known to a party.
28/08/2014	Oban Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff W D Small	PF v Etonella Christlieb OBN2014-000138	Ex proprio motu; Personally known to a party of the action

22/10/2014	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Cowan	PF v George Mutch SCS/2013/-110352	Defender; Sheriff drew to parties’ attention that she was a member of the RSPB before commencement of a trial as the case involved an investigation carried out by the RSPB and many witnesses were RSPB officers. She invited parties to consider whether she should take the trial. The defenders, having considered the issue, made a motion for the Sheriff to recuse herself, which she then did.
08/12/2014	Alloa Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff D Mackie	I v J*	Ex proprio motu; Contemporaneous and overlapping proceedings comprising an appeal and a referral from the children’s hearing relating to children from the same family.
16/12/2014	Court of Session (Civil)	Lad y Clark of Calton	Petition: Thomas Orr & another for Order Under Companies Act P1769/08	Ex proprio motu; Senator personally known to parties of the action.

Judicial Recusals 2015

DATE	COURT & TYPE OF ACTION	JUDGE	CASE NAME & REF	MOTION BY & REASON
22/01/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Extradition)	Sheriff Maciver	Poland v Lukasz Kosowski	**Ex proprio motu; Sheriff involved in case at earlier stage of proceedings
30/01/2015	Dumfries Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff G Jamieson	Browns Hairdressers v Lauren Brown A82/13	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had previously dealt with the issue under dispute
06/02/2015	Greenock Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff I M Fleming	Helen Humphreys v Norna Crabba B593/14	Ex proprio motu; Previous professional relationship between Sheriff's former firm of solicitors and the defender
10/02/2015	High Court of Justiciary (Criminal)	Lady Scott	HMA v John McGregor IND2014-3553	Ex proprio motu; Due to a previous ruling made by the Senator in relation to a separate indictment against the accused
10/02/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Jones	Steven Paterson v David MacLeod & ors PD812/13	Pursuer; Due to a previous finding by the Senator in relation an expert witness whose evidence is crucial to the pursuer's case
13/03/2015	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff A Cowan	HMA v John Paris Lyon SCS-2015/012519	Ex proprio motu; Accused known by the Sheriff as a reg u l a r observer of court proceedings from the public gallery

17/03/2015	Forfar Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Di Emidio	PF v Kevin R Hutcheon SCS 2014-110800	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness
18/03/2015	Lerwick Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Mann	PF v William McCover Ler-2015/000142	Ex proprio motu; Circumstance may give rise to a suggestion of bias.
16/04/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Arthurson QC	David H Kidd v Ronald G Clancy QC SC74/15	Ex proprio motu; Personally known to a party of the a ct i on
12/05/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Boyd of Duncansby	K v L*	Defender; Senator was Lord Advocate when a successful prosecution was brought against one of the respondents.
14/05/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Brailsford	M v N*	Defender; Senator previously involved in this case.
14/05/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff McColl	David H Kidd v Ronald G Clancy QC SC74/15	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a party of the action
27/05/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff F Crowe	CEC v James McMillan SD738/14	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had previously deal with a case in which the defender was a witness
29/05/2015	Glasgow Sheriff Court (FAI)	Sheriff Principal Scott QC	FAI - Glasgow Bin Lorry	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to one of the deceased
04/06/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Glennie	Marshall Ronald v Duke of Buccleugh	Ex proprio motu; Senator is an acquaintance of a party to the action

04/06/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Burns	Marshall Ronald v Duke of Buccleugh	Ex proprio motu; Senator previously acted as defence counsel in a criminal trial involving the pursuer
24/07/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff K M Maciver	PF v James McKinstry	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a party in the case
11/08/2015	Banff Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Mann	PF v James J Duguid SCS/2015-086256	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a party of the action, having previously acted on behalf of the family while in private practice
21/08/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Mackie	GE Money Secured Loans Limited v Kenneth More & Shirely More B64/15	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff in dispute with pursuer
28/08/2015	Dundee Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Murray	PF v Peter Whyte and Helen Williams SCS-2015/088655	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness
03/09/2015	Dumbarton Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Turnbull	O v P*	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had previously acted for client in a dispute against the pursuer
04/09/2015	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Mackie	GE Money Home Lending Ltd v Susan Glancy B1078/15	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff involved in a dispute against a party to the action
15/09/2015	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Stirling	PF v Graham Gordon SCS/2015008686	D efender; Sheriff previously considered and refused i s s u e s wh i ch the accused wished to revisit

01/10/2015	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff W. J. Taylor	PF v Stanley Lawrence SCS/2014098082	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff was privy to certain i nfo rmati o n a b o ut the accused's credibility
08/10/2015	Lanark Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Stewart	PF v Laura Harrower LAN2015-000186	Ex proprio motu; Accused made complaints against the Sheriff and staff
12/10/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lady Clark of Calton	Rehab Abdel-Rahman for Judicial Review P833/11	Ex proprio motu; Senator an acquaintance of a party to the action
20/10/2015	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Crozier	HMA v Gilmour and Dean SCS-2015/103172	Ex p ropri o motu; S h eriff personally known to a director of the accused's company
20/10/2015	Inverness Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Sutherland	Church street investments v Julie Doughty SA296-15	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a party of the action
12/11/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Malcolm	MacRoberts LLP v McCrindle Group Ltd CA133/12	Ex proprio motu; Senator acted as Senior Counsel for the defenders in a related action
18/11/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Boyd of Duncansby	Petition: Hunt for Judicial Review	Ex proprio motu; Relative of Senator involved in the action
26/11/2015	Inverness Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff G Fleetwood	The MacKenzie Law Practice v John Holden SA163/15	Ex proprio motu; Personally known to a party of the action

27/11/2015	Court of Session (Civil)	Lady Paton	William Beggs v Scottish Information Commissioner XA105/14	Ex proprio motu after intimation to parties and a negative response from the Pursuer; Senator was on the bench for an appeal against conviction by the Pursuer
09/12/2015	Wick Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Berry	PF v Martin McGowan 2015/00289	Ex proprio motu; Complainer personally known to the Sheriff
22/12/2015	Lanark Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Stewart	Q v R[1] [2]	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to both parties of the action

Judicial Recusals 2016

DATE	COURT & TYPE OF ACTION	JUDGE	CASE NAME & REF	MOTION BY & REASON
26/01/2016	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Uist	Andrew MacLeod v Graham Douglas & another A356/14	Pursuer; Senator dealt with same issue and same witnesses in a case being appealed
27/01/2016	Dumbarton Sheriff Court	Sheriff Gallacher	Daniel Macaulay v Robert Whitton & Margaret Whitton SA653/15	**Ex proprio motu; Sheriff involved in previous proceedings
09/02/2016	Elgin Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Pasportnikov	PF v Katie & Andrew O'Hare SCS/2015-137949	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over related case
10/02/2016	Elgin Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Pasportnikov	PF v Scott Bate SCS2015- 137058	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over a recent criminal and civil case.

18/03/2016	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Ross	S v T*	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over criminal matter involving appellant
18/03/2016	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff A Stirling	Dandara Ltd AB15009178/SCS - 2015 - 1552552	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over civil matter involving accused
14/04/2016	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Braid	PF v John Wyse SCS/2016-041402	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously dealt with the accused in a previous case.
25/04/2016	Ayr Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Montgomery	Thomas Port and Catherine Port v Steven Easton and Easton Kitchens and Bathrooms A147/15	Joint motion; Sheriff previously acted for the defender as a solicitor
03/05/2016	Lanark Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff N C Stewart	PF v Alexander Law Law/2015-000463	Ex proprio motu; Complainer previously represented by Sheriff's husband
20/05/2016	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Bracadale	Donal Nolan v Advance Construction (Scotland) Ltd CA132/11	On the pursuer's motion in relation to the judge's previous decision to refuse the pursuer's appeal at a procedural hearing
23/05/2016	Forfar Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff P Di Emidio	HMA v Alexander Sturrock SCS 2016-044654	Ex p ro p rio motu; Sheriff previously granted a search warra n t a n d i s be i n g ch a l l e n ged by the accused

13/06/2016	Glasgow Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff S Reid	Norna Crabbe v Alexander Reid & Others A8111/07	P ursuer; Personally known to a witness
22/06/2016	Perth Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff David Clapham	Commercial Legal Centre LLP v Cargo Bar Ltd SA5616	Ex proprio motu; Pursuer known to Sheriff
09/08/2016	Dunoon Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Thomas Ward	Derke Rodger v Capercaille Books Limited A14/15	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness
19/08/2016	Greenock Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Thomas Ward	PF Greenock v Henry Kerr and Angela Deeney GRE-2016 000548/GR16001177	Ex proprio motu; Accused known to Sheriff from Sheriff's time in private practice
23/08/2016	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Alison Stirling	PF v Dandara LTD SCS2015155252- SCS2015101495	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff Stirling found the accused's company liable in a civil matter
13/09/2016	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Pentland	William Russell & others v John Morre and others A77/16	Joint motion; Senator previously acted for the first named defender

25/10/2016	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Brailsford	HMA to appt admin re Mohammond Younas P1442/15	Appellant; A close relative is employed by one of the parties involved in the case
10/11/2016	Kilmarnock Sheriff Court (Criminal)	Sheriff Foran	PF v Stewart Daly KIL-2016-000635	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness
17/11/2016	Dumfries Sheriff Court	Sheriff G Jamieson	Ronald Adams v Ronald Bell Dum-A62/16	Defender; Sheriff presided over a related civil proof in another case in which parties were witnesses.
18/11/2016	Court of Session (Civil)	Lord Glennie	Adebayo Aina for Leave to appeal a Decision of the Upper Tribunal XA99/16	Ex proprio motu; Earlier decision on a related issue might reasonable be though to influence any decision in the present case
30/11/2016	Perth Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff R McFarlane	S Koronka (Manufacturing) Ltd v Musgrave Generators Ltd A103/16	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff acted for the pursuers when p ractising as a solicitor

Judicial Recusals 2017

DATE	COURT & TYPE OF ACTION	JUDGE	CASE NAME & REF	MOTION BY & REASON
30/01/17	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Crowe	Robert Wylie (EDI 2016 012008)	**Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over criminal matter involving accused, which might reasonably be thought to influence any decision in the present case
13/02/17	Portree Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Taylor QC	T v U[3]	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously dealt with a criminal case involving parties
23/02/17	Inverness Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Fleetwood	Ashwin Bantwal v Vrishali Shenoy	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff presided over a jury trial involving parties
29/03/17	Perth Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Wade QC	Drysdale Motorcycles v Derek Annand & Edwin McLaren (SE9/15)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff, in her previous role as advocate depute, was heavily involved in preparing the prosecution of one of the parties in the action

06/04/17	Kilmarnock Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Foran	Lynsey Henderson v NHS Ayrshire & Arran Health Board (KIL-PD55-14)	Pursuer's motion granted; A witness was a former client of the Sheriff in previous role in private practice
04/05/17	Elgin Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Pasportnikov	PF Elgin v Douglas Welsh (ELG2017-000441)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff had previous knowledge of the parties through a Children's Hearing matter
16/05/17	Banff Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Mann	PF Banff v Kate Law (x2) (BAN-2016-172) (BA16000365)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to relatives of the accused
12/06/17	Glasgow Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Platt	Lucy Bruce v Andrew Bruce (GLW-F619-14)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness
04/08/17	Forfar Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Murray	Dundee Joinery Limited v Mike Hall (FFR-SG157-17)	Defender's motion granted; Sheriff had acted on behalf of the Pursuer in a civil action against the prospective Lay Representative as a Defender prior to him being appointed as a Sheriff
14/08/17	Elgin Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Pasportnikov	Ann Hawksley v Gordonstoun Schools Limited (ELG-A80-16)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff has previous knowledge of the parties
23/08/17	Kilmarnock Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff McFarlane	V v W*	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff has previous involvement with the parties

05/09/17	Edinburgh Sheriff Court (Civil)	Sheriff Tait	W v X*	Ex proprio motu; The outcome of previous proceedings involving one of the parties might reasonably be thought to influence any decision in the present case
10/10/17	Alloa Sheriff Court (Children's Hearing)	Sheriff Mackie	Y v Z*	Ex proprio motu; Appeal arises as a direct consequence of a decision of the same Sheriff
18/10/17	Aberdeen Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff McLaughlin	Bosede Obe Oghughu (SCS/21017-080483)	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously presided over a trial involving the same accused and same witnesses.
23/10/17	Dumbarton Sheriff Court (civil)	Sheriff Pender	Promontoria v Colin & David Wilson	Ex proprio motu; Personally known to a party in the action
30/10/17	Wick Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Berry	Robert John Sutherland	Ex proprio motu; Family personally known to Sheriff
14/12/17	Dundee Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Way	HMA v Megan Sandeman (DUN2017-002839)	Defence motion granted; Written material sent to the court for the Sheriff's attention, also enclosed in a victim impact statement provided by the Crown, may reasonably have impugned the Sheriff's impartiality
19/12/17	Wick Sheriff Court (criminal)	Sheriff Berry	PF Wick v Ian Stuart Sinclair	Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness

*Parties anonymised due to sensitive nature of case **Of the judge’s own accord

DATE NAME OF JUDGE (AND COURT/TRIBUNAL) CASE NAME (AND/OR REF) MOTION BY & REASON 8/1/18 Sheriff Montgomery (Ayr Sheriff Court) James McColm v Meiqin McColm (F138/16) **Ex proprio motu; Knowledge of pursuer's family background 19/1/18 Sheriff Fleetwood (Inverness Sheriff Court) Ashwin Bantwal v Vrishali Shenoy (INV-SM18-17) Ex proprio motu; Sheriff previously recused himself in another case involving the parties, having earlier presided over a jury trial involving parties 1/2/18 Lord Justice Clerk (Court of Session) Petition to the Nobile Officium by Derek Cooney (P115/17) Petitioner's motion refused; no valid objection stated 6/2/18 Moira Clark (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 8212/SO63* Ex proprio motu;Personal conflict of interest 12/2/18 Sheriff A Brown (Dundee Sheriff Court) HMA v M Islam and S Smekramuddin (DUN2017-4074) Ex proprio motu;Witness known to Sheriff 23/2/18 Dr Ross Hamilton (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 8709/S063* Ex proprio motu; Patient known to the Medical Member, having treated a relative 27/2/18 Graham Harding (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/18/0148 Ex proprio motu; Party is a client of the tribunal member's firm 6/3/18 Dr Ross Hamilton (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 7987/S1012b* Ex proprio motu; Previously provided second opinion on same patient 15/2/18 Linda Reid (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/17/0480 Ex proprio motu; Potential conflict of interest as the tribunal member has a professional relationship with certain partners and associates of the agents for one of the parties 20/2/18 Nicola Weir (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/18/0150 Ex proprio motu; One of the parties is the tribunal member's family solicitor 28/2/18 Ian Campbell Matson   (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) N/A Ex proprio motu; Work as locum at same hospital 7/3/18 Andrew Upton (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/18/0250* and CV/18/0251* Ex proprio motu; The tribunal member's firm acts for the parent company of one of the parties 13/3/18 Dr James Deans (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 9142/S095* Ex proprio motu; Previously treated patient on compulsory basis 21/3/18 Sheriff Principal Lewis   (Sheriff Appeal Court) Gabriel Politakis v RBS & Others Ex proprio motu; Previously presided in appeal involving appellant 23/3/18 Sheriff A Anwar (Glasgow Sheriff Court) GLW-F417-13 Ex proprio motu; Sheriff personally known to a witness 3/4/18 Graham Harding (Housing and Property Chamber) PF/18/0233 Ex proprio motu; conflict of interest 9/4/18 Mark Andrew (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/18/0162 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member known to tenants involved in the case 9/4/18 Sheriff Fleetwood (Inverness Sheriff Court) PF v Jade Brown (INV 2017-1048) Joint motion granted; Sheriff was a longstanding agent of a key witness 17/4/18 Gillian Buchanan (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/16/0210 Ex proprio motu; Respondent has conmnection to member's firm 2/4/18 Lady Paton (Court of Session) XA88/16 Motion by party litigant refused; no good reason for recusal TBC Patricia Ann Pryce (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/16/0210 Ex proprio motu; Conflict 25/4/18 Gillian Buchanan (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/18/0602 Ex proprio motu; Previously acted for landlord 27/4/18 Graham Harding (Housing and Property Chamber) RT/18/0586 Ex proprio motu; One of the parties a client of the firm the applicant works for 27/4/18 Gillian Buchanan (Housing and Property Chamber) RT/18/0586 Ex proprio motu; Respondent known to applicant as client of Member's firm 3/4/18 Sheriff Caldwell (Falkirk Sheriff Court) SCS/2018-035424 Sheriff heard evidence in a trial with same accused and witnesses 11/5/18 David Preston (Housing and Property Chamber) PF/17/0315 Ex proprio motu; factor known to applicant 11/5/18 Sheriff Fleetwood (Inverness Sheriff Court) A v B* Respondent's motion granted; The sheriff, having previously made a Permancence Order in respect of the child, declined jurisdiction to hear the adoption proof 14/5/18 Ewan Miller (Housing and Property) Chamber CV/18/0981 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm acts for on eof the parties 14/5/18 Susan Napier (Housing and Property Chamber) PF/18/0240 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's worked for the housing association party when the development concerned was built 23/5/18 Elizabeth Currie (Housing and Property Chamber) CV/18/0599 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member works for the local authority and is responsible for landlord registration 23/5/18 Jacqui Taylor (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/18/1075 and  CV/18/1077 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm has acted for one of the parties 24/5/18 Jim Bauld (Housing and Property Chember) RP/18/0961 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm instructed by one the parties 29/5/18 Andrew Cowan (Housing and Property Chember) CV/18/1130 and EV/18/1127 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm acts for the applicant 29/5/18 Jim Bauld (Housing and Property Chamber) PF/18/0571 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm acts for the landlord 4/6/18 Jim Bauld (Housing and Property Chamber) LM/18/1073 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member's firm acts for factor 5/6/18 Rory Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/18/1078 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member previously dealt with one of the parties 12/6/18 Sheriff Cook (Edinburgh Sheriff Court) PF v Josh Harkness Defence motion granted; Sheriff had presided over a trial involving same accused and complainer 11/7/18 Lord Brailsford (Court of Session) Margaret Paterson v SCCR  (P376/17) Ex proprio motu; Lord Brailsford was one of a three-judge panel who had refused the petitioner leave to appeal the criminal conviction at second sift. The reason for refusing leave was germaine to the challenge raised in the judicial review. 31/7/18 Helen Miller (Additional Support Needs Tribunal) AR/18/0006 Case indirectly involves the school attended by tribunal member's son 27/7/18 Sheriff Ward (Dunoon Sheriff Court) PF v Gavin Murphy Defence motion refused; Sheriff previously dealt with a children's social work referral in relation to the accused where the complainers were witnesses 2/8/18 Andrew Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) PR/18/1159 Tribunal member's firm acted for the landlord's agents in separate matters 14/8/18 Andrew Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) RA/18/1621 Potential conflic of interest 19/9/18 Sheriff Fleming (Glasgow Sheriff Court) National Westminster Bank Plc v Morag Horsey (GLW-B885-18) Ex proprio motu; prior professional conflict 19/9/18 Sheriff Hamilton QC (Dumbarton Sheriff Court) DBN-SG155-18 Amir Smoli v John Currie Ex proprio motu; Sheriff knows the pursuer 21/9/18 Carolyn Hirst (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/18/1740 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member has a conflict of interest, having worked as an independent consultant for one of the parties 28/9/18 Sheriff Dickson (Tain Sheriff Court) TAI-F43-13 Ex proprio motu; The Sheriff has knowledge of one of the parties in the conext of criminal proceedings 12/10/18 Alison Kelly (Housing and Property Chamber) CV/18/1659 and PR/18/1408 Ex proprio motu; Tribnual member knows the letting agent who is acting for the applicant 13/12/18 Temporary Judge Norman Ritchie QC   (Glasgow High Court) HMA v Craig Tonnar (IND 2018/1312 Ex proprio motu; Material placed before the court may reasonably have impugned the judge's decision on sentence. 13/12/18 Sheriff Berry (Wick Sheriff Court) PF v William Fernie Ex proprio motu; Accused is well known to the Sheriff 30/1/19 Suzanne Sinclair (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 08500/S063 Ex proprio motu; Psychiatrist who completed a medical report for a CTO application is the Tribunal member's Doctor. 4/2/19 Suzanne Sinclair (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 08622/S050 Ex proprio motu; Appeal against a Short Term Detention Order made by a Doctor who was formerly the Tribunal member's Doctor 6/2/19 Lady Wise (Court of Session) AD10/18 Ex proprio motu; The Lord Ordinary having heard Counsel at diet of proof that there was no opposition to the granting of the Petition and the natural parents were consenting, indicated that she was satisfied on the merits of the Petition. Subsequently however, the natural parents withdrew said consent and the matter required to proceed to proof. The Lord Ordinary indicated that as she had stated her view on the merits of the case she was not now in a position to hear the case. 8/2/19 Lord Bannatyne (Court of Session) Agilisys Ltd v CGI IT UK Ltd (CA 55/17) Defender's motion granted; The Lord Ordinary, having made findings in respect of the credibility and reliability of some of the defender's witnesses in the first proof, and being mindful of a real possibility of the perception of bias arising therefrom, recused himself from hearing the second proof, at which some of the same witnesses would again give evidence. 18/2/19 Sheriff Summers (Aberdeen Sheriff Court) Blair Nimmo v Richard Dennis (SQ60-18) Ex proprio motu; Sheriff knows parties involved in the case 27/2/19 Sheriff Anwar (Glasgow Sheriff Court) David Grier v Chief Constable, Police Scotland Pursuer's motion granted; The sheriff, having previously intimated to parties that recusal may be necessary, declined jurisdiction, given that another sheriff at Glasgow was listed among the potential witnesses. 5/3/19 Rory Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) EV/18/3486 and CV/18/3487 Ex proprio motu; case involves a former client of the Tribunal member. 7/3/19 Suzanne Sinclair (Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland) 09471/S063 Ex proprio motu; Doctor who completed a medical report for a CTO application is the Tribunal member's Doctor. 12/3/19 Simone Sweeney (Housing and Property Chamber) PF/18/2240 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member is an employee of one of the parties 19/3/19 Jim Bauld (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/19/0110 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member is an employee of the fim which acts for the letting agent party 20/3/19 Helen Forbes (Housing and Property Chamber) CV/19/0143 Ex proprio motu; Legal Member acts for the appplicant's representative 27/3/19 Patricia Anne Pryce (Housing and Property Chamber) FTS/HPC/CV/19/0249 Member has conflict with party 2/4/19 Sheriff Thomas Ward Dunoon Sheriff Court John & Joanne Ingham v Damien & Sheila Brolly Sheriff Ward has heard evidence in a previous case in relation to the same parties, involving the same or similar issues. 4/4/19 Rory Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) RP/19/0381 Ex proprio motu; Tribunal member is employed by the Respondent representative 25/4/19 Andrew Cowan (Housing and Property Chamber) CV/19/0602 Ex proprio motu; Legal member has previously acted for the applicant 29/4/19 Sheriff Fleetwood Inverness Sheriff Court Caroline Brown v Strathearn Stabling SG2/19 Ex proprio motu; A person known to the sheriff has a financial interest in the outcome of the case

---

JUDICIAL REGISTER: Justice Committee investigate approach to judges’ interests in other countries – MSPs say ‘Recusals register not comprehensive enough’ ‘Openness & transparency do not contradict independence of the judiciary’

Justice Committee continues probe on Judges’ interests. A SEVEN YEAR probe by two committees of the Scottish Parliament - on cross party supported proposal to create a Register of Judges’ Interests – has called for views on how other jurisdictions tackle both judicial recusals and methods of declarations of judicial interests.

During discussions between members of Holyrood’s Justice Committee on Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary, MSPs expressed the view that openness and transaprency – which the register of judges’ interests petition seeks to create – does  not contradict the independence of the judiciary.

Daniel Johnson MSP stated: “As was the case when we considered the petition previously, I think that there are reasons to examine it. In everything that I say, I bear in mind our duty to uphold the independence of the judiciary, but I do not believe that openness and transparency contradict that.”

Another Justice Committee MSP also expressed views on the completeness of the current Register of Recusals – a register of conflicts of interest which was created by ex Lord President Brian Gill during April 2014 - in response to the petition.

John Finnie MSP said: “I fully endorse Daniel Johnson’s view, and particularly the comment about independence. However, there is an obvious tension here. There is a public expectation—it is not unreasonable, in my view—that there should be no conflicts of interest. Our papers refer to the recusal register, but that does not seem comprehensive enough to me.”

While no reference was made to new evidence submitted to the Justice Committee, documenting work by serving Scottish judges in the Gulf States, a full submission by the petitioner to the Committee can be read in the previous report on Justice Committee work on the petition, here: MSPs urged to take forward SEVEN year petition to create a Register of Judges’ Interests as Holyrood Justice Committee handed evidence of Scottish Judges serving in Gulf states regimes known to abuse Human Rights

The lengthy Scottish Parliament probe on judicial interests has generated over sixty two submissions of evidence, at least twenty one Committee hearings, a private meeting and fifteen speeches by MSPs during a full Holyrood debate and has since been taken over by Holyrood’s Justice Committee after a recommendation to take the issue forward from the Public Petitions Committee in March 2018.

The proposal, first debated at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in January 2013 – calls for the creation of a publicly available register of judicial interests – containing information on judges’ backgrounds, figures relating to personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, membership of organisations, property and land, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world.

The move to create a register of judicial interests enjoys cross party support, backing in the media, and crucial support from two of Scotland’s Judicial Complaints Reviewers – including Moi Ali

Moi Ali – who served as Scotland’s first Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) - appeared before the Public Petitions Committee in a hard hitting evidence session during September 2013,and gave full sypport to the proposals calling for the creation of a register of judicial interests.– reported here: Judicial Complaints Reviewer tells MSPs judges should register their interests like others in public life.

Petition PE1458 Register of Interests for Judges Scottish Parliament Justice Committee 5 Feb 2019

Judiciary (Register of Interests) (PE1458)

The Convener (Margaret Mitchell Central Scotland Scottish Conservatives) :  Agenda item 4 is consideration of two petitions. I refer members to paper 4, which is a note by the clerk, and paper 5, which is a private paper. Paragraph 5 of paper 4 provides the options that are available to the committee when it considers petitions.

The first petition that the committee will consider is PE1458, by Peter Cherbi, on a register of interests for members of Scotland’s judiciary. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament

“to urge the Scottish Government to create a Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill (as is currently being considered in New Zealand’s Parliament) or amend present legislation to require all members of the Judiciary in Scotland to submit their interests & hospitality received to a publicly available Register of Interests.”

This is the committee’s third consideration of the petition. I refer members to annex A of paper 4, which details the response that was received from the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. The committee is asked to consider what, if any, further action it wishes to undertake in relation to the petition. The options available include: keeping the petition open; keeping it open and taking additional action, such as writing to the cabinet secretary and/or others; or closing the petition. I seek members’ views.

Daniel Johnson (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab): As was the case when we considered the petition previously, I think that there are reasons to examine it. In everything that I say, I bear in mind our duty to uphold the independence of the judiciary, but I do not believe that openness and transparency contradict that. The Public Petitions Committee took evidence on the issue, but that was some time ago—I believe that it was in 2013—so I wonder whether the committee might want to pull together information regarding how other countries approach the issue. Given that we have a new Cabinet Secretary for Justice, we could perhaps also request his views on the matter.

John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (Green): I fully endorse Daniel Johnson’s view, and particularly the comment about independence. However, there is an obvious tension here. There is a public expectation—it is not unreasonable, in my view—that there should be no conflicts of interest. Our papers refer to the recusal register, but that does not seem comprehensive enough to me. I agree with the proposal that we should find out about the approach in other countries, particularly New Zealand, as that would be helpful.

Rona Mackay (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP): I totally agree with Daniel Johnson and John Finnie. More information would be helpful. It is an important issue, and transparency has to be key.

Daniel Johnson: For information, I point out that the bill on the issue that was before the New Zealand Parliament was either withdrawn or defeated, but I understand that a register exists in other jurisdictions. I think that Norway has been mentioned.

The Convener (Margaret Mitchell): Clearly, there are huge issues at stake, and a fine balance has to be struck. I would like to know a little more about how the recusal code or policy works. When a conflict of interest is declared, how much detail is recorded and is it in the public domain? It would be good to look at that.

I get the impression from members that they would like to at least explore legislation in other countries. Norway has been mentioned. New Zealand did not proceed with the proposals, but it would perhaps be good to look at what was said there. As Daniel Johnson rightly points out, we have a new cabinet secretary, so it would be good to seek his views.

Are members content to progress by doing those three things?

Members indicated agreement.

The Justice Committee hearing on Petition PE1458 was also reported in the National newspaper here:

Seventh year of register or judges interests petition

By Martin Hannan Journalist  07 Feb 2019

The committee will also seek the views of Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf

FOR nearly one third of the entire lifetime of the Scottish Parliament, MSPs have been discussing the petition put forward by law journalist and campaigner Peter Cherbi calling for a register of judges’ interests.

Now in its seventh year of consideration, the petition calls on the Scottish Parliament “to urge the Scottish Government to create a Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill ... or amend present legislation to require all members of the Judiciary in Scotland to submit their interests and hospitality received to a publicly available Register of Interests.”

In the latest development, Holyrood’s Justice Committee has decided to call for more evidence after the Petitions Committee referred the case to them. John Finnie, Highland MSP for the Greens, said: “There is a public expectation – it is not unreasonable, in my view – that there should be no conflicts of interest.”

The committee will also seek the views of Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf.

As a result of the petition, the Scottish judiciary now keep a register of recusals, when a judge or sheriff steps aside from a case.

Cherbi commented: “It does somehow feel like the six years of work from the Public Petitions Committee (PPC) should be put to better use, and work should now begin on creating the register rather than repeating the evidence exercise.

“Seven years is a long time for a petition on transparency, especially one calling for a register of judicial interests to the equivalent or higher standard of the same register which MSPs are required to adhere to.

“I feel we must now move on and take the good work of MSPs on the PPC to bring this register into existence,” he added.

Previously, on the Register of Judicial Interests Petition -

A video report of the Public Petitions Committee backing for the petition can be viewed online here: Petition PE 1458 Register of Judicial Interests Public Petitions Committee 22 March 2018

A full report containing video footage of every hearing, speech, and evidence sessions at the Scottish Parliament on Petition PE1458 can be found here: Scottish Parliament debates, speeches & evidence sessions on widely supported judicial transparency petition calling for a Register of Interests for Scotland's judiciary.

MSP at Holyrood have previously heard over sixty two submissions of evidence, during twenty one Committee hearings, and a private meeting between two MSPs and a top judge, and two private meetings since early December 2017 to decide a way forward on their six year investigation.

Cross party support for the Petition at the Scottish Parliament saw fifteen speeches by MSPs during a full Holyrood debate spanning from 2012 to 2018.

A full debate on the proposal to require judges to declare their interests was held at the Scottish Parliament on 9 October 2014 - ending in a motion calling on the Scottish Government to create a register of judicial interests. The motion was overwhelmingly supported by MSPs from all political parties.

Scotland’s second Judicial Complaints Reviewer Gillian Thompson OBE also supported  the petition and the creation of a register of judicial interests during an evidence session at Holyrood in June 2015.

Video footage and a full report on Lord Brian Gill giving evidence to the Scottish Parliament in November 2015 can be found here: JUDGE ANOTHER DAY: Sparks fly as top judge demands MSPs close investigation on judges’ secret wealth & interests - Petitions Committee Chief brands Lord Gill’s evidence as “passive aggression”

Video footage and a full report on Lord Carloway (Colin Sutherland) giving widely criticised evidence to the Scottish Parliament in July 2017 can be found here: REGISTER TO JUDGE: Lord Carloway criticised after he blasts Parliament probe on judicial transparency - Top judge says register of judges’ interests should only be created if judiciary discover scandal or corruption within their own ranks

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 can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary.

POLICE DECLARED: Cops Interests Register reveals controversial Chief Constable retains Law Society of Scotland membership, holds seat on ‘Sentencing Council’ quango – yet details fail to give clear picture of highly paid top cops links, interests

Top Cops interests ‘declared’  WHILE Scotland’s judiciary continue to battle against declaring their considerable wealth, influence, links & financial interests, Police Scotland has released new information into the less than detailed world of how Scotland’s well paid top cops are required to declare their interests.

The information, published in response to a Freedom of Information request also reveals Police Scotland’s current Chief Constable Iain Livingstone – who once faced a case involving five allegations of sexual assault from a female colleague – retained his membership of the powerful lawyers lobby – the Law Society of Scotland.

It is worth noting, Chief Constable Iain Livingstone - a former solicitor - appears to have retained his Law Society membership – since joining the Police in the 1990’s, through the critical phase of the tribunal hearings into the sexual assault allegations during his time at Lothian & Borders Police - to his appointment as Chief Constable of Police Scotland, and to this date.

The declarations of interests by all officers, regardless of rank – also note Iain Livingstone’s position on the Scottish Sentencing Council – a quango created by the Scottish Government after the retirement of Lord Brian Gill – who once criticised the quango as politicial interference with the judiciary.

The Scottish Sentencing Council’s role is to create sentencing guidelines for the courts - and is currently headed by the Lord Justice Clerk – Lady Dorrian.

However, while the declarations are a welcome window on the interests of Scotland’s senior Police Officers, the lack of detail in comparison to information contained in registers of interest such as those required by Members of the Scottish Parliament – do raise questions any keen financial investigators would quickly notice – such as the flow of salaries, cash, assets and other business interests which may have been purposely placed in relatives names.

The declarations of interests o Police Scotland’s current top cops – which were supplied by Police Scotland’s ‘information unit’ only after an initial refusal to release the information, reveal the following:

CC Iain Livingstone:

Public Appointments:

Member - Independent Steering Group (Op Kenova), Reviewed Annually - No remuneration.

Member - Scottish Sentencing Council, Reviewed Annually - No remuneration.

No Financial and Business interests No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interest

DCC Fiona Taylor:

No Public Appointments

Financial and Business interests - Owns a flat which is let No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interest

ACC Bernard Higgins:

Public Appointments:

Trustee - Police Care UK (formerly known as Police Dependents Trust), May 2013 - Present - No remuneration.

Board Member - Euro 2020 Local Organising Committee, 2017 - Present - No remuneration

No Financial and Business interests No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interest

ACC Angela McLaren:

Public Appointments:

Trustee - The Police Treatment Centres, for a period of 3 years - No remuneration. - Companies House shows Appointed on: 01st December 2018.

Trustee - St George's Police Children Trust, for a period of 3 years - No remuneration. - Companies House shows appointed on 1st December 2018.

No Financial and Business interests No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interest

ACC Paul Anderson:

Public Appointments:

Chair Racing Committee, Scottish Canoe Association, 2019-2020 - No remuneration.

No Financial and Business interests No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interests

Other Executive Officers

DCC Johnny Gwynne (retired 15/03/2019 but in post at the date of request)

DCC Will Kerr, ACC Mark Williams, ACC John Hawkins, ACC Gillian MacDonald, ACC Alan Speirs, ACC Malcolm Graham, ACC Steve Johnson

No Public Appointments No Financial and Business interests No Political activity No related party transactions No conflict of interest

A previous media investigation into Police Officers interests in Scotland, revealed offices are required to declare their interests, with the information held on a database which can be accessed via Freedom of Information legislation.

The earlier report is published here: COPS & JOBBERS: Scotland’s 1,512 ‘Two Job’ Cops required to declare outside business interests – meanwhile 700+ strong Scots judiciary resist Holyrood probe calling for judges' register of interests

Police Service of Scotland Regulations 2013 - Business interests:

5.—(1) A constable must not have a business interest without the consent of— (a) the Authority, in the case of a senior officer; (b) the chief constable, in the case of any other constable, provided that, in the case of any such constable in whose case the chief constable has an interest otherwise than as chief constable, the chief constable must refer the matter to the Authority for it to consider whether to consent.

(2) If a constable acquires or is likely to acquire a business interest, the constable must forthwith give written notice of that interest to the chief constable or, in the case of a senior officer, the Authority.

(3) If a constable has a business interest and is appointed to the office of chief constable, deputy chief constable or assistant chief constable, the constable must forthwith give written notice of that interest to the Authority unless the constable has previously disclosed that interest to the Authority.

(4) An individual applying for appointment to the Police Service, other than an individual referred to in paragraph (5), must give written notice to the chief constable of any business interest which that individual has or is likely to acquire after appointment.

(5) An individual applying for appointment to the office of chief constable, deputy chief constable or assistant chief constable must give written notice to the Authority of any business interest which that individual has or is likely to acquire after appointment.

(6) An individual or constable is regarded as having a business interest if— (a) that individual or constable carries on any business or holds any office or employment for hire or gain (otherwise than as a constable) in the United Kingdom; (b) that individual or constable resides at any premises where any member of that individual’s or constable’s family keeps a shop or carries on any like business in Scotland; (c) that individual or constable holds, or any member of that individual’s or constable’s family living with that individual or constable holds, any licence, certificate or permit granted in pursuance of the laws relating to liquor licensing or betting and gaming or regulation of places of public entertainment in Scotland or has any pecuniary interest in such licence, certificate or permit; or (d) that individual’s or constable’s spouse (not being separated from that individual or constable), civil partner (not being separated from that individual or constable) or cohabitant (not being separated from that individual or constable) keeps a shop or carries on any like business in Scotland.

(7) For the purposes of this regulation— (a) “member of that individual’s or constable’s family” includes parent, son, daughter, dependant, brother, sister, spouse (not being separated from that individual or constable), civil partner (not being separated from that individual or constable) or cohabitant (not being separated from that individual or constable); and (b) “cohabitant” means a member of a couple consisting of— (i) a man and a woman who are living together as if they were husband and wife; or (ii) two individuals of the same sex who are living together as if they were civil partners.

COPS DECLARE, JUDGES CONCEAL:

While Police Officers have been required to declare their interests for a number of years, members of Scotland's judiciary continue to wage a bitter SEVEN YEAR campaign against proposals to require members of Scotland’s judiciary to declare their interests, and links to big business.

The salary scales of officers in Police Scotland - where all officers are required to declare their interests - show a Police Scotland constable can expect £26,037 per annum going up to £91,179 for a Chief Superintendent with 3 years experience to Assistant Chief Constables: £118,485 , Deputy Chief Constables: £174,741 and the Chief Constable: £214,404

However – Scotland;s judges have no such requirement to declare interests, despite huge judicial salaries which rank as the highest in all of Europe - skyrocketing from Sheriffs on £137,538 a year up to Sheriff Principals on £148,526 a year while judges of the Outer House of the Court of Session earn £185,197 a year and Inner House judges earning £210,876 per annum.

The Lord Justice Clerk (currently Lady Dorrian) earns £221,757 a year, and the Lord President (currently Lord Carloway, aka Colin Sutherland) earns £229,592 a year.

The proposal to bring greater transparency to Scotland’s judiciary - Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary - first debated at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in January 2013 – calls for the creation of a publicly available register of judicial interests – containing information on judges’ backgrounds, figures relating to personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, membership of organisations, property and land, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world.

A full debate on the proposal to require judges to declare their interests was held at the Scottish Parliament on 9 October 2014 - ending in a motion calling on the Scottish Government to create a register of judicial interests. The motion was overwhelmingly supported by MSPs from all political parties.

Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations by Diary of Injustice including reports from the Sunday Herald and Sunday Mail newspapers, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary.