Scottish Human Rights Law Group

The accused challenged her conviction before the District Court on a charge of breach of the peace and of wilfully and recklessly destroying or damaging property belonging to another, on the basis that she had been found guilty after the justice had adjourned to consider her verdict and in chambers, outwith the presence of the parties sought clarification in chambers from the deputy clerk of court as to the effect of the prosecutions failure to cross examine the accused, who gave exculpatory evidence in her own defence.   

The accused submitted that the securing of legal advice from the clerk to the justice in private contravened the requirements of Article 6 as set out by the Privy Council in Clark v. Kelly . In rejecting these submission the High Court held that while the guidelines set forth in Clark had not been followed, that in itself did not breach the accused’s Convention rights as the advice in fact tendered by the clerk conformed with the law as set out by the High Court in Young v Guild and so no miscarriage of justice or unfairness followed from the fact that legal advice had been given the justice in private rather than in open court.