« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
REPORT OF THE SUMMARY JUSTICE REVIEW COMMITTEE: SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE WRITTEN CONSULTATION - FINAL REPORT
CHAPTER ELEVEN SUMMARY CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (iv): A SUMMARY APPEAL COURT
INTRODUCTION
11.1 The Report detailed proposals for the creation of a new summary appeal court which would hear all summary appeals against sentence, and have the discretion to refer any issues raising questions of law, or sentencing principles of wider application, to the High Court. The written response form asked:
"Do you agree with the creation of a summary appeal court?"
IN FAVOUR OF THE CREATION OF A NEW SUMMARY APPEAL COURT
11.2 Only a minority of responses dealt with the issue of the creation of a new summary appeal court. Of these, only a small number supported the recommendation, including ACPOS, Falkirk District Justices' Committee and North Lanarkshire Council.
11.3 The Law Society of Scotland also supported the principle of a new summary appeal court, provided that the composition of the court was narrow, and that it was under the supervision of a Sheriff Principal. The Society believed that only then could the court achieve the degree of consistency that is currently achieved by the High Court of Justiciary sitting in its appellate capacity:
"The [Society] believes that the creation of a summary criminal appeal court could lead to summary appeals being disposed of quickly and if the court is peripatetic, appellants can be represented by their own solicitors in a relatively local court."
11.4 Moray Council also supported the idea of a summary appeal court, but only if the court sat as a bench of three rather than two, comprising a Sheriff Principal and two experienced sheriffs.
11.5 A few responses, although in favour of the principle of a summary appeal court, suggested that an experienced sheriff should be able to hear an appeal without the necessity of it being heard by a Sheriff Principal, since Sheriffs Principal dealt mainly with civil work.
AGAINST THE CREATION OF A NEW SUMMARY APPEAL COURT
11.6 There were many reasons given for respondents' inability to support this recommendation. Some noted that the proposals lacked sufficient detail, but that they would welcome the opportunity to comment should more detailed proposals become available in the future.
11.7 The Scottish Law Agents' Society was not convinced by the proposals, believing that within the appeal process it was essential that the circumstances in which an appeal was justified were clear. This, they felt, could only be accomplished by one body having responsibility for all appeals.
11.8 The Sheriffs Principal agreed that the process of appeals that arose from summary criminal cases should be quicker. However, they stated that current business of the High Court of Justiciary could not be transferred by Scottish legislation. They also envisaged practical difficulties in establishing a summary appeal court.
11.9 A minority of respondents felt that there was already a recognised and clearly defined hierarchy under which the High Court heard all appeals from the summary courts, and rejected the recommendations as they would upset that hierarchy. In addition, they argued that there would be an opportunity for defence agents to bypass the summary appeal court by arguing that questions of law or of sentencing principle of wider application arose from the appeal.
« Previous | Contents | Next »