Big Wullie
Joined: 25 Apr 2007
Posts: 1149
Location: Glasgow
|
 Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 12:44 am Post subject: Scotland "Same" As England Claims Lord Mackay |
 |
|
In the following case Lord Mackay of Drumadoon claimed the following:
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2009CSOH61.html
| Quote: | | [23] Both those cases illustrate the courts in England have an inherent power to restrain any abuse of the power of litigants to summon witnesses. In my opinion there is no reason why, as a matter of principle, the courts in Scotland should be in a different position. |
Why then have people been denied access to lawyers when being interviewed by Police for decades yet our English counterparts have enjoyed this privilege.
Appeals have been rejected under English law for years in Scotland.
This other paragraph is disturbing:
| Quote: | | [26] As far as the other three individuals are concerned, on the basis of the information before me, including the pleadings in the present proceedings, the contents of Nos. 33 and 34 of Process and the submissions I heard, I am satisfied that the motion should be refused. In the present proceedings, Mr. Macniven is acting in the capacity of solicitor for the petitioners. He has acted in that capacity throughout. As such he is bound by client confidentiality and could not be asked any questions relating to the matters set out in the section relating to him in No. 37 of Process, or indeed to "the defined issues" as focussed in the written pleadings and the Calls for Further Specification and Answers (Nos. 24, 25, 26 and 28 of Process). In my opinion, it is possible to determine at this stage that any evidence Mr. Macniven could give relating to such matters would be inadmissible. For that reason, I have reached the view that the third respondent's wish to cite him as witness is likely to be for some inappropriate reason. |
They can dictate which witness's you are allowed to call and not call.
In my opinion this is not compatible with section 6 of your right to a fair hearing.
How can "Lawyer Client Confidentiallity" stop anyone from calling their Solicitor as a witness.
My Lawyer that conducted my ID Parade was cited but never called, so how can the court decide your Lawyer's evidence will not be heard under this pretence of Confidentiallity ?
Surely the overriding factor should be "Justice" and to see that justice was being done ?
Surely the Lawyer's overriding duty is to see Justice done.
This case is alarming.
Would this also mean that when the SCCRC ask your Lawyer's questions about your cases they cannot answer them ?
_________________
http://justiceforwulliebeck.webs.com/index.htm
http://williambeck.blogspot.com/
http://williambeck.wordpress.com/about/ |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
