Unterschutz (Ronald) v HM Advocate

 

The accused was charged with fraud in connection with income tax returns some time after he had been interviewed under caution by officers of the Inland Revenue. In denying the accused’s claim that the reasonable time requirements for Article 6 purposes ran from the date of these interviews the court held that the Inland Revenue was not a “competent authority” for the purpose of charging a person with a criminal offence within the Scottish criminal justice system and that in any event nothing was said or done in the course of the interview that could properly be regarded as official notification of an allegation that the accused had committed a criminal offence.  

Although the Revenue officers thereafter decided to report to the Inland Revenue Solicitor for Scotland, it still required a decision on his part to report the matter to the procurator fiscal, and for the latter and Crown Office, to decide whether there should be criminal proceedings before it could be said that criminal proceedings had commenced.

 

This is available to read here

Art. 06 Right to a Fair Trial, Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure

Leave a reply

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Disclaimer

Full copyright remains with the original author of each article. Please contact our contributing editors for source information.

Browse by

Cross Reference

Search Type

Search

SHRLG Archives

Formed in May 2009, the Scottish Human Rights Law Group is a non-affiliated, independent, professional network for those engaged in legal practice and study, in academia and politics, in campaigning and in the provision of advice. It exists to raise awareness and knowledge of human rights law in Scotland, and to provide a forum for discussion of matters of interest across the field. The group organises seminars and roundtable discussions on human rights and is accredited for the purposes of CPD.