Edinburgh Research Explorer Final Appellate Jurisdiction in the Scottish Legal System Citation for published version: Walker, N 2010, Final Appellate Jurisdiction in the Scottish Legal System. Scottish Government. <http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/299388/0093334.pdf> Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publisher Rights Statement: ©Walker, N. (2010). Final Appellate Jurisdiction in the Scottish Legal System. Scottish Government. 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: 07. Oct. 2021 FINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION IN THE SCOTTISH LEGAL SYSTEM Crown Copyright 2010 ISBN: 978-0-7559-8213-4 Further copies are available from Eli do Rego The Scottish Government Legal System Division 2nd Floor West St Andrew’s House Edinburgh EH1 3DG 0131 244 3839 [email protected] An electronic copy of the full report including appendices is available at www.scotland.gov.uk PROFESSOR NEIL WALKER RR Donnelley B63059 01/2010 Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations www.scotland.gov.uk School of Law, Edinburgh University FINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION IN THE SCOTTISH LEGAL SYSTEM PROFESSOR NEIL WALKER Regius Professor of Public Law and the Law of Nature and Nations School of Law, Edinburgh University © Crown copyright 2010 ISBN: 978-0-7559-8213-4 Further copies of the report can be obtained from: Eli do Rego The Scottish Government Legal System Division 2nd Floor West St Andrew’s House Edinburgh EH1 3DG 0131 244 3839 [email protected] An electronic copy of the full report including appendices is available at www.scotland.gov.uk/publications RR Donnelley B63059 01/10 The text pages of this document are printed on recycled paper and are 100% recyclable Acknowledgements I have many people to thank for their help in the preparation of this report. First of all, there are the various judges, advocates, solicitors, civil servants, academics and others who generously gave of their valuable time to share their thoughts with me on the future of appellate jurisdiction in Scotland. As these exchanges took place under conditions of anonymity I cannot convey my thanks to all of these persons individually, but I want to record my gratitude to each and every one of them for their expertise and insight. On the administrative side, warm thanks are due to Lachlan Stuart of the Courts and Administrative Justice Team in the Scottish Government's Constitution, Law and Courts Directorate for his invaluable assistance. On the academic side, I was in the very fortunate position of being able to draw upon the wise counsel of a small Steering Group made up of Sir David Edward, David Johnston QC and Professor Tom Mullen. They read numerous drafts, often at extremely short notice, and provided just the right mix of critical insight and encouragement at our regular meetings. I greatly appreciate their constant and selfless support. Dr Elisenda Casanas Adam of the Universitat Autònoma di Barcelona drew upon her considerable expertise in matters of ‘judicial federalism’ to make an important contribution to the comparative dimension of the research, for which I am also very grateful. Last, but certainly not least, I wish to convey my enormous gratitude to Dr Daniel Carr of the Law School of the University of Dundee, who has worked tirelessly on this project with me over the last year. I could not have asked for a better research assistant or a more engaging intellectual collaborator. He takes full credit for the Appendices, and whatever is of value in the report itself is due in no small part to his sterling efforts. Neil Walker Old College January 2010 2 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 5 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION REMIT, CONTEXT AND PLAN OF REVIEW...................................................... 9 1.1 REMIT.............................................................................................................................................................9 1.2 CONTEXT.........................................................................................................................................................9 1.2.1 The Immediate Context........................................................................................................................ 9 1.2.2 The Fuller Historical Background........................................................................................................10 1.3 PLAN OF REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................12 CHAPTER TWO: THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT........................................................................................ 13 2.1 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................13 2.2 THE UNION STATE...........................................................................................................................................13 2.3 EVOLVED RATHER THAN DESIGNED .....................................................................................................................15 2.4 PROVISIONAL RATHER THAN FINAL......................................................................................................................16 2.5 ASYMMETRICAL RATHER THAN SYMMETRICAL .......................................................................................................17 2.6 DEEP DIVERSITY AND FORMAL DIVERGENCE .........................................................................................................18 2.7 CLOSE INTERMESHING AND SUBSTANTIVE CONVERGENCE .......................................................................................19 CHAPTER THREE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.................................................. 21 3.1 THE TERMS OF THE UNION SETTLEMENT..............................................................................................................21 3.2 THE DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL APPEALS...................................................................................22 3.3 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION AND THE RELATIVE AUTONOMY OF SCOTS LAW ............................................................23 3.4 DEVOLUTION ISSUES: THE BIRTH OF A CONSTITUTIONAL JURISDICTION ......................................................................25 3.5 OVERVIEW OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM...................................................................................................................27 3.5.1 Final appeal in London: appeals to the Supreme Court......................................................................27 3.5.1.1 Civil appellate jurisdiction............................................................................................................................27 3.5.1.2 Devolution Issues .........................................................................................................................................31 3.5.2 Final appeal in Scotland .....................................................................................................................32 3.5.2.1 Appeals to the Court of Session ...................................................................................................................32 3.5.2.2 Appeals to the High Court of Justiciary ........................................................................................................32 CHAPTER FOUR: COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES .......................................................................................... 34 4.1 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................34 4.2 THE VERTICAL AXIS; DECENTRALISATION AND JURISDICTIONAL AUTONOMY..................................................................35 3 4.3 THE HORIZONTAL AXIS; THE SCOPE AND DIVISION OF JURISDICTION FOR A TOP COURT ...................................................41 4.4 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................................47 CHAPTER FIVE: THE EVALUATION OF FINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ........................................................ 48 5.1 CRITERIA OF EVALUATION .................................................................................................................................48 5.2 DEMOCRACY ..................................................................................................................................................49 5.3 FAIR TREATMENT ............................................................................................................................................53