Advocate (HM) v Friel
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Date | 1978 |
| Year | 1978 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
Brown v Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline)
...Even with a caution, anything in the nature of cross-examination would render the answers inadmissible: Chalmers; HM Advocate v Friel (1978 SLT (Notes) 21). But for the Companies Act, Scottish common law would have reached exactly the same result in relation to the Mr Saunders' answers to t......
-
Margaret Anderson Brown V. Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline
...& Excise and where the answers obtained were in consequence held inadmissible in a criminal trial I refer to H.M. Advocate v. Friel 1978 S.L.T. (Notes) 21. I conceive that, but for section 434(5) of the Companies Act 1985, the Scottish common law would have reached exactly the same result i......
-
Her Majesty's Advocate V. William Duncan+lisa Stuart
...Clerk (Grant) said in Miln v Cullen was "undue pressure, cajoling or trapping" and what Lord Ross described in Friel v HM Advocate 1978 SLT (Notes) 21 as "sustained and forceful questioning". Similarly and unsurprisingly, deception on the part of the police would normally amount to unfairne......
-
Her Majesty's Advocate V. Stephen Ronald
...Clerk (Grant) said in Miln v Cullen was "undue pressure, cajoling or trapping" and what Lord Ross described in Friel v HM Advocate 1978 SLT (Notes) 21 as "sustained and forceful questioning". Unsurprisingly, deception on the part of the police would normally amount to unfairness, particular......