Report on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Report on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION promoting law reform Report on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility Report on a reference under section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers July 2004 SE/2004/92 EDINBURGH: The Stationery Office £16.10 ii The Scottish Law Commission was set up by section 2 of the Law Commissions Act 19651 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law of Scotland. The Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Eassie, Chairman Professor Gerard Maher, QC Professor Kenneth G C Reid Professor Joseph M Thomson Mr Colin J Tyre, QC. The Chief Executive of the Commission is Miss Jane L McLeod. Its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. Tel: 0131 668 2131 Fax: 0131 662 4900 E-mail: [email protected] Or via our website at www.scotlawcom.gov.uk - select "Contact" NOTES 1. For those wishing further copies of this paper it may be downloaded from our website or purchased from TSO Scotland Bookshop. 2. If you have any difficulty in reading this document, please contact us and we will do our best to assist. You may wish to note that an accessible electronic version of this document is available on our website (text only version). 1 Amended by the Scotland Act 1998 (Consequential Modifications) (No 2) Order 1999 (S.I. 1999/1820). ii SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION Report on a reference under section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Report on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility To: Ms Cathy Jamieson MSP, Minister for Justice We have the honour to submit to the Scottish Ministers our Report on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility (Signed) RONALD D MACKAY, Chairman GERARD MAHER KENNETH G C REID JOSEPH M THOMSON COLIN TYRE Miss Jane L McLeod, Chief Executive 7 May 2004 v Contents Paragraph Page Part 1 Introduction Terms of reference 1.1 1 The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 1.4 1 Consultation 1.5 2 Disposals 1.9 2 Statistics 1.16 4 Main recommendations for reform 1.22 6 Legislative competence 1.26 7 Part 2 Insanity as a defence Introduction 2.1 8 Option of no change to the current law 2.7 10 Abolition of insanity as a defence 2.15 12 Name of the reformed defence 2.19 14 Constituent elements of the defence 2.25 15 The presence of mental disorder 2.25 15 Connecting link (causation) 2.31 16 Specific effect of mental disorder on criminal conduct 2.38 18 Mental disorder and appreciation of conduct 2.42 19 A volitional element 2.52 23 Psychopathic personality disorder 2.57 25 ECHR implications 2.64 27 Part 3 Diminished responsibility Introduction 3.1 30 A statutory statement of the test for diminished responsibility? 3.5 31 Abolition of the plea of diminished responsibility 3.10 32 Name of the plea 3.12 33 The substance of the test 3.14 33 The relationship with the special defence based on mental disorder 3.18 34 The psychopathy exclusion 3.24 36 The intoxication exclusion 3.35 39 Diminished responsibility in crimes other than murder 3.43 42 ECHR implications 3.51 44 vii Paragraph Page Part 4 Insanity as a plea in bar of trial Introduction 4.1 45 Options of no change and abolition 4.5 46 Name of the plea 4.8 47 Nature of the test 4.11 47 Exclusion of amnesia 4.20 50 ECHR implications 4.24 51 Part 5 Evidence and Procedure A. The defence based on the accused's mental disorder 5.2 54 Burden of proof 5.2 54 Defence raised by the accused 5.3 54 Burden of proof in relation to defences 5.6 55 The implications of the ECHR 5.10 56 Insanity raised by the prosecution 5.29 62 Procedural nature of the defence 5.38 64 Verdict following the defence 5.40 64 B. Diminished responsibility 5.46 66 Burden of proof 5.46 66 Notice of the plea 5.50 67 C. Unfitness as a plea in bar of trial 5.54 68 Right to raise issue of unfitness in bar of trial 5.54 68 Standard of proof 5.58 69 Evidential requirements in relation to unfitness as a plea in bar 5.60 69 of trial Notice of the plea in summary proceedings 5.64 70 D. Transitional provisions 5.66 71 The special defence based on mental disorder; diminished 5.66 71 responsibility Unfitness in bar of trial 5.69 72 Part 6 List of recommendations 73 Appendix A Draft Criminal Responsibility and Unfitness for Trial 77 (Scotland) Bill Appendix B List of consultees who submitted written comments on 91 Discussion Paper No 122 Appendix C Mental health experts who assisted with the project 92 viii Abbreviations 1995 Act Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 2003 Act Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 Butler Report Report of the Committee on Mentally Abnormal Offenders, chaired by the Rt Hon Lord Butler (Cmnd 6244, 1975) Gordon Sir Gerald H Gordon QC, The Criminal Law of Scotland, Vol I, (3rd edn ed Michael G A Christie) (Edinburgh, 2000) Hume Baron Hume, Commentaries on the Law of Scotland, Respecting Crimes (4th edn) (Edinburgh, 1844; reprinted, 1986) Mackay R D Mackay, Mental Condition Defences in the Criminal Law (Oxford, 1995) McAuley Finbarr McAuley, Insanity, Psychiatry and Criminal Responsibility (Dublin, 1993) Millan Report New Directions: Report on the Review of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 by a Committee chaired by the Rt Hon Bruce Millan (SE/2001/56) Renton & Brown Renton & Brown's Criminal Procedure (6th edn ed Sir Gerald H Gordon QC) (Edinburgh) ix Part 1 Introduction Terms of reference 1.1 In October 2001 we received the following reference1 from the Scottish Ministers: "(1) To consider – (a) the tests to establish insanity (either as a defence or as a plea in bar of trial) and the plea of diminished responsibility; and (b) issues of the law of evidence and procedure involved in raising and establishing insanity and diminished responsibility; and (2) To make recommendations for reform, if so advised; and (3) Consequent upon any such recommendations for reform, to consider what changes, if any, should be made to the powers of the courts to deal with persons in respect of whom insanity (either as a defence or as a plea in bar of trial) or diminished responsibility has been established." 1.2 We received the reference following the report of a committee chaired by the Rt Hon Bruce Millan, which undertook a comprehensive review of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984.2 In the course of preparing its report, the committee received representations about difficulties encountered in practice arising from the tests for insanity, both as a defence and as a plea in bar of trial, and for diminished responsibility.3 The Committee recommended that the Scottish Law Commission should review these topics and as a result we received the reference from Scottish Ministers. 1.3 The bulk of the Millan Committee's recommendations have been implemented by the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003. This Act is mainly concerned with the civil law on mental health. By contrast, our project concentrates on specific aspects of the criminal law relating to persons with mental disorder. The provisions of our bill, if enacted, would form another part of the process of reform of the law relating to mental health. The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 1.4 Since the time of its enactment the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, which is a consolidation statute, has been the subject of numerous amendments. As a consequence the Act has become cumbersome in form and difficult to use. Moreover, the Scottish Executive has announced that the main provisions of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, which makes extensive and complicated amendments to the 1995 Act, will be brought into force in April 2005. In view of the fact that the 1 Under section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965. 2 New Directions: Report on the Review of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 (SE/2001/56). 3 Millan Report, ch 29, esp paras 43-61. 1 amendments are relevant to our recommendations, we have decided to proceed on the basis that all the amendments to the 1995 Act have been commenced. Accordingly, our recommendations and the provisions of the draft bill annexed to this report4 have been drafted to take account of the changes made by legislation up to and including the 2003 Act.5 Consultation 1.5 The topics covered by our reference involve a wide range of issues in both law and mental health. At the start of the project we held a seminar with a view to discovering current thinking on these issues. The seminar was attended by academic lawyers as well as legal and medical practitioners, and helped us considerably in identifying and developing the principles which were the subject of our proposals for reform. Our thanks are due to the speakers and the other participants who contributed to the seminar proceedings.6 1.6 Our Discussion Paper on Insanity and Diminished Responsibility was published in January 2003.7 It invited comments on our proposals to introduce statutory tests to replace the common law rules on diminished responsibility and on insanity as a defence and plea in bar of trial. The paper also sought comments in relation to the burden and standard of proof required to establish the defence and pleas. We are grateful to all the persons and organisations who responded to the Discussion Paper.8 1.7 We also held a meeting with a number of experts in the field of mental health to discuss various matters arising from the responses to the Discussion Paper.
Recommended publications
  • Thematic Report on The
    Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland Thematic Report on the Victims’ Right to Review and Complaints Handling and Feedback Follow-Up Report May 2018 © Crown copyright 2018 Produced and Published by the Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland (IPS) ISBN: 978-1-78851-890-1 http://www.gov.scot/about/public-bodies/ipis If you require this publication in an alternative format and/or language, please contact us to discuss your needs. ~ 1 ~ Contents Page Part I – Victims’ Right to Review Introduction 4 Key Terms 5 Key Findings 7 Recommendations 8 VRR Policy, Processes and Procedures 9 Case Review Sample 11 Application of the Reasonableness Test 12 Quality of Reviews 15 Effectiveness of Review 15 Quality of the VRR Process 16 Notification of Decisions 17 Time Limits 21 Communication and Contact 26 Timeliness of the VRR Process 30 Annex A – Criminal Law and Procedure 32 Annex B – Victim Information and Advice (VIA) Remit 35 Part II – Complaints Handling and Feedback Follow-Up Report Introduction 2 Follow-Up 3 Other Developments 5 Recommendations 7 Progress Against Recommendations 8 Concluding Remarks 13 ~ 2 ~ Part I – Victims’ Right to Review ~ 3 ~ Introduction Victims’ Right to Review The Victims’ Right to Review (VRR) scheme was introduced by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) on 1 July 2015.1 The VRR scheme gives victims the right to request a review of a decision by COPFS not to prosecute a criminal case or to discontinue criminal proceedings that have commenced.2 For victims of crime or bereaved relatives, contact with the criminal justice system is unfamiliar and often traumatic.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Investigations: Court Proceedings
    Criminal investigations: court proceedings Version 3.0 Page 1 of 37 Published for Home Office staff on 20 November 2019 Contents Contents ..................................................................................................................... 2 About this guidance .................................................................................................... 4 Contacts ................................................................................................................. 4 Publication .............................................................................................................. 4 Changes from last version of this guidance ............................................................ 4 Starting a prosecution in England and Wales ............................................................. 5 Allocating a case to court ........................................................................................... 6 Summary offences .................................................................................................. 6 Either way offences ................................................................................................ 7 Indictable offences .................................................................................................. 7 Mode of trial hearing................................................................................................... 8 If the plea is guilty ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM
    The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM. No. 82) (SCOT. LAW COM. No. 45) LIABILITY FOR DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS REPORT ON A REFERENCE UNDER SECTION 3(l)(e) OF THE LAW COMMISSIONS ACT 1965 Presented to Parliament by the Lord High Chancellor and the Lord Advocate by Command of Her Majesty June 1977 LONDON HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE €1.60 net Cmnd. 6831 The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Lax Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are- The Honourable Mr. Justice Cooke, Chairman. Mr. Stephen B. Edell. Mr. Derek Hodgson, Q.C. Mr. Norman S. Marsh, C.B.E., Q.C. Dr. Peter M. North. The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr. J. M. Cartwright Sharp and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WClN 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are- The Honourable Lord Hunter, V.R.D., Chairman. Mr. A. E. Anton, C.B.E. Mr. R. B. Jack. Mr. J. P. H. Mackay, Q.C. Professor T. B. Smith, Q.C. The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Mr. J. B. Allan and its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 IPR. 11 LIABILITY FOR DEFECTIVE PRODUCT§ CONTENTS Paragraph Pc. ,5 e PART I-INTRODUCTION . 1 1 The terms of reference . , . 1 1 The Royal Commission -.- . 3 1 The Strasbourg Convention . 6 2 The EEC Directive . 7 3 Our consultative document . 9 3 Results of consultation . , . 11 4 The need for an early report .
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary-Hearings-Bench-Book.Pdf
    Preliminary Hearings Bench Book The Hon Lord Matthews The Hon Lord Beckett July 2020 Updated 20 November 2020 and 23 February 2021 JUDICIAL INSTITUTE | PARLIAMENT HOUSE | EDINBURGH PAGE 1 OF 140 Foreword by the Lord Justice General The Preliminary Hearing system was designed, first, to deal with all preliminary pleas and issues in advance of the trial and, secondly, to fix a trial diet, within the 140 day time limit, at a point when the case was ready for trial. The trial would proceed as scheduled, other than where desertion or a guilty plea followed. As a result of having a dedicated cadre of pro-active judges who have made a collective effort to maintain a uniform and effective approach, the introduction of a Preliminary Hearing has been largely successful in producing an efficient system which complies with the intention of the legislation and ensures that trials are held within a reasonable time. Practitioners, staff and judges prefer to work in a system which operates efficiently. In the case of counsel and especially agents, there ought to be a degree of satisfaction on completion of a prosecution, whatever its outcome. In an effort to maintain a consistent and effective approach to case management, Lords Matthews and Beckett have co-authored this comprehensive Bench Book for the conduct of Preliminary Hearings. It will provide support to the Preliminary Hearing judges in dealing with the many issues which must be addressed. It will also be a valuable tool for practitioners who will better understand the obligations which rest upon them and the expectations the court will have of them.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill (SP Bill 46) As Introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 6 February 2014
    This document relates to the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill (SP Bill 46) as introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 6 February 2014 COURTS REFORM (SCOTLAND) BILL —————————— POLICY MEMORANDUM INTRODUCTION 1. This document relates to the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 6 February 2014. It has been prepared by the Scottish Government to satisfy Rule 9.3.3 of the Parliament‘s Standing Orders. The contents are entirely the responsibility of the Scottish Government and have not been endorsed by the Parliament. Explanatory Notes and other accompanying documents are published separately as SP Bill 46–EN. POLICY OBJECTIVES OF THE BILL 2. The policy objective of the Bill is to address the problems identified in the Scottish Civil Courts Review1 headed by Lord Gill, then Lord Justice Clerk, and now Lord President of the Court of Session. The Review concluded that the Scottish civil courts provide a service to the public that is ―slow, inefficient and expensive‖. It went on to say that ―minor modifications to the status quo are no longer an option. The court system has to be reformed both structurally and functionally‖. 3. The review made 206 recommendations for change. The Scottish Government has accepted the majority of these recommendations. Many of the recommendations of the Review will be implemented by court rules made by act of sederunt as they concern matters which either do not require primary legislation or are more appropriate for setting out in court rules as they concern the day to day routine workings of the courts. The Bill seeks to establish the framework for the civil courts in Scotland recommended by the Review, within which the detailed arrangements may be made by court rules.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland's Bastard Verdict: Intermediacy and the Unique Three-Verdict System
    SCOTLAND'S BASTARD VERDICT: INTERMEDIACY AND THE UNIQUE THREE-VERDICT SYSTEM Joseph M. Barbato* Veredictum quasi dictum veritatis; utjudicium quasijuris dictumt I. INTRODUCTION In 1707, the separate kingdoms of Scotland and England reached an accord whereby each was dissolved and the two united into the new Kingdom of Great Britain.' After three hundred years, the Scottish Parliament has devolved from the larger Parliament of the United Kingdom.2 Scotland' s desire to retain sovereignty is apparent in -retrospect. For instance, one of the important Acts of Union between both countries' parliaments in the early 1700s was to preserve the separate identity of the Scottish legal system and institutions.3 This note will consider one small but emblematic part of Scotland's legal system, the verdict of "not proven." Part Two begins with the concept of Scotland's national identity, and follows the chronological development of the country's three-verdict system. With this foundation, two comprehensive legal reviews involving the not proven verdict, both of which resulted in its retention, are discussed. Part Three examines post-millennial developments in the not proven debate, and also compares how this uniquely Scottish verdict has made an imprint on the American legal system. Finally, Part Four takes into account renewed controversy in Scotland over the verdict, recognizing that the potential costs of doing away with "not proven" currently outweigh possible benefits. * J.D. candidate, May 2005. M.F.A., Purdue University, 2002. B.A., Purdue University, 1998. The author would like to thank his wife, Hannah, for her love, support, and forbearance throughout the law school experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Procedure – Preliminary Plea
    1.19 Criminal court procedure As we are already aware, criminal trials in Scotland are conducted under two types of procedure: ◆ Summary ◆ Solemn Less serious crimes are dealt with under summary procedure where a judge sits alone, i.e. the presiding judge is therefore ‘master of the facts’ and will determine the appropriate sentence to be handed down if the accused is found guilty. On the other hand, more serious crimes are conducted under solemn procedure where usually one judge sits with a jury of 15. In this type of trial, the jury is said to be ‘master of the facts’ and the judge’s role is merely to impose the penalty if the guilt of the accused is established beyond reasonable doubt. We shall look at the workings of both types of criminal procedure in turn. Summary procedure – preliminary plea As the name suggests, summary procedure is supposed to deal with minor crimes relatively quickly and efficiently and is used in the Justice of the Peace Court and the Sheriff Court. A judge presides and no jury is present. The accused person is prosecuted on complaint. A complaint is the document which outlines the specific nature of the criminal offence that the accused will have to answer at the trial. KEY POINT: Summary procedure is supposed to deal with minor crimes relatively quickly and efficiently and is used in the Justice of the Peace Courts and the Sheriff Court. The First Calling The first time that the prosecution and the defence lawyers appear in court will be at the First Calling.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 42: Defence Statements 42.1 Introduction 42.1.1 Section 124 Of
    Chapter 42: Defence Statements 42.1 Introduction 42.1.1 Section 124 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 inserts section 70A into the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. Section 70A provides that in the course of all solemn cases, following service of the indictment, the defence must lodge a defence statement at least 14 days before the first diet/preliminary hearing and thereafter must, at least 7 days before the trial diet either lodge another defence statement or a statement intimating that there has been no material change in circumstances since the previous defence statement was lodged. 42.1.2 Defence statements may also be lodged in summary cases but this is not mandatory. 42.2 What is a Defence Statement? 42.2.1 Defence Statement is the term given to a document prepared and lodged by the defence setting out – (i) the nature of the accused’s defence, including any particular defences on which the accused intends to rely, (ii) any matters of fact on which the accused takes issue with the prosecution and the reasons for doing so, (iii) particulars of the matters of fact on which the accused intends to rely for the purposes of the accused’s defence, (iv) any point of law which the accused wishes to take and any authority on which the accused intends to rely for that purpose, (v) the nature of any information that the accused requires the prosecutor to disclose by reference to the accused’s defence, and (vi) the reasons why the accused considers that disclosure by the prosecutor of the information outlined at (v) above is necessary 42.2.2 It is important not to confuse these documents with defence witness statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Briefing Paper on the Convention-Compatibility of New Pre-Trial Defence Disclosure Regime
    Briefing Paper on the Convention-compatibility of new pre-trial defence disclosure regime Lewis Kennedy, Advocate. Defence Statements under section 70A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995: Introduction: 1. Defence statements are now a statutory requirement in respect of solemn cases commenced after 6 June 20111, under section 70A in the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (as inserted by section 124 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010). 2. It is a matter of some concern that these provisions constitute an erosion of the common law adversarial system. In recent years, there has been a perceptible movement away from the traditional adversarial model towards a more inquisitorial form of trial – with the judicial micro- management of cases dressed up with the antiseptic label of ‘case management’. A culture has emerged subordinating procedure to substance. With this new regime, there is an increased risk that the judge might enter the arena too enthusiastically, acting as an advocate and second prosecutor – such that the impartial administration of justice might appear to be prejudiced. 2 3 3. In England, the correlating legislation could at least be said to have been directed towards assisting in the operation of a more sophisticated and regulated disclosure regime. Here, the equivalent legislation has no stated purpose. Certainly, there is no indication as to the rationale behind this 1 By reference to the date of the first appearance on Petition 2 See A ‘just’ outcome: losing sight of the purpose of criminal procedure, James Richardson, Q.C. This is available at: http://www.acclawyers.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/6-Richardson-A-Just-Outcome-2011-JCCL- 105.pdf 3 See R v Malcolm [2011] EWCA Crim 2069 1 legislation in the Explanatory Notes in the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law
    THE HAMLYN LECTURES Fortieth series Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law J. C. Smith Justification and Excuse in the Criminal Law by J. C. Smith, Chi: QC LLD.FB A Honorary Bencher of Lincoln's Inn; Honorary Fellow of Downing College, Cambridge; Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Nottingham. In this book based on the 40th series of Hamlyn Lec- tures, Professor Smith examines a subject of great importance to the criminal law, both as a current topic of extensive academic debate and in the context of the problems faced by the ordinary citizen when con- fronted with a choice between breaking the letter of the law and suffering, or seeing others sutfer, harm. Issues discussed include: 0 The distinction between justification and excuse, and the consequences that may flow from it, the Stephen Waldorf case is examined in the context of potential resistance to mistakenly applied but law- ful force 0 Whether circumstances unknown to the defendant may amount to a defence 0 Judicial interpretation of statutory "let-out" clauses, such as "without reasonable excuse", "dishonesty" and "recklessness" and of phrases such as "inten- tion" which came under discussion in the Gillick case 0 Necessity and duress: "mercy killings" and the judicial discovery of the defence of circumstances. 0 The future of justification and excuse, in case law, legislation or codification The author examines these legal and practical dilemmas in another of his scholarly and thought- provoking contributions to criminal law, which will be of absorbing and lasting interest not only to students and teachers, but also, in keeping with the wishes of the founder of the Trust, to more general readers with an interest in the workings of the legal system and the conflicts inherent in it.
    [Show full text]
  • Practice Area Competencies – Criminal Litigation
    Practice Area Competencies – Criminal Litigation The objective of the Status is to recognise the work carried out by accredited paralegals and trainee accredited paralegals and provide a formal accreditation. It will provide an assurance of high quality and standards to employers, other members of the legal profession and clients. As an accredited paralegal or trainee accredited paralegal you must be aware of the general competencies applicable to all members, which can be found under Schedule D of the Scheme of Operations. These competencies cover the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes you are expected to exhibit as a member of the Accredited Paralegal Status. Together with these general competencies, each practice area has its own scope of competence, skills, knowledge and understanding as shown below. Scope of competence An Accredited Paralegal should be able to progress a criminal defence case from taking client's initial instructions through to conclusion of the case including attending court, where required. Specifically, the paralegal should be competent to: • Meet with and interview a client or defence witness – taking clear and concise instructions • Advise clients on the procedural aspects of cases at both summary and solemn level • Advise clients on the financial eligibility tests for the different types of SLAB funding that may be available • Process all types of relevant applications using the Legal Aid online portal (if applicable) • Correspond and liaise with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, Police Scotland,
    [Show full text]
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer
    Edinburgh Research Explorer 'A Stitch in Time?' Citation for published version: Hood, P 2008, ''A Stitch in Time?': Repairs and Rejection in Sale of Goods', Edinburgh Law Review, vol. 12, pp. 316-21. https://doi.org/10.3366/E1364980908000462 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.3366/E1364980908000462 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Published In: Edinburgh Law Review Publisher Rights Statement: ©Hood, P. (2008). 'A Stitch in Time?': Repairs and Rejection in Sale of Goods. Edinburgh Law Review, 12, 316- 21doi: 10.3366/E1364980908000462 General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 26. Sep. 2021 Analysis EdinLR Vol 12 pp 259-261 DOI: 10.3366/E1364980908000334 A Paradigm of Orthodoxy: Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd In Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd1 the House of Lords reaffirmed that before there is liability to make reparation in delict the pursuer has to have sustained harm as a consequence of the defender’s wrongful conduct: damnum injuria datum.
    [Show full text]