H. M. Advocate v Hasson
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 14 May 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 6. |
| Date | 14 May 1971 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
JC
Lord Cameron.
Procedure—Preparation for trial—Trial in High Court—Commission and diligence for recovery of documents—Competency of recovery—Relevancy of calls—Relation of calls to indictment and defence.
A panel indicted in the High Court on charges of embezzlement, fraud and uttering, applied to the Court for a commission and diligence for the recovery of certain documents for the purpose of preparing his defence, which included a special defence of incrimination in relation to some of the charges. The specification lodged indicated the matters which excerpts from the documents sought were intended to prove.
Lord Cameron refused one of the calls as unnecessary andquoad ultra granted the application, holding (1) that such an application was competent in prosecutions in the High Court; (2) that the decision as to the relevancy of a call in such a specification was a matter for the Court; (3) that the applicant should at least indicate to the Court in general terms the relation of each call in the specification to the charge or charges and the proposed defence; and (4) that the calls in the specification lodged made plain the purpose for which they were made in relation to the charges contained in the indictment, to which they specifically referred, and would also provide the commissioner with sufficiently clear guidance as to the documents of which recovery had been sought and authorised.
Observed that the proper test of the relevancy of a call for production of documents in the hands of third parties, especially when such parties are not on the list of witnesses for the Crown or defence, is an issue of very considerable difficulty which requires authoritative definition and determination.
Downie v. H. M. Advocate, 1952 J.C. 37,considered.
Opinion in Renton and Brown, Criminal Procedure, (3rd ed.) p. 77, that a statement by the accused's responsible adviser that the document sought was required for the conduct of the defence should be regarded by the Court as sufficient to justify recovery, disapproved.
Alan Guthrahan Hasson was charged on an indictment at the instance of Her Majesty's Advocate which set forth that "you did, while acting as Most Worshipful Grand Master of the Grand Loyal Orange Lodge of Scotland, 348 Cathedral Street, Glasgow, (1) between 20th December 1958 and 8th April 1960, both dates inclusive, in the premises of said lodge at 348 Cathedral Street aforesaid or at South Manse...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McDonald v HM Advocate
...accused sought to recover was said to be in the possession of either the Crown or the Post Office. Subsequently, in HM Advocate v Hasson 1971 JC 35, a case of embezzlement, Lord Cameron granted a commission and diligence for the recovery of various books of a lodge belonging to the Grand Or......
-
EXPRESS Newspapers Plc PETITIONERS
...the petitioners were fined £50,000 for contempt of court. Cases referred to: Advocate (HM) v BellSC 1936 JC 89 Advocate (HM) v HassanSC 1971 JC 35 Advocate (HM) v Lowson (1909) 6 Adam 118 Advocate (HM) v Scotsman Publications Ltd [not reported] (1998) GWD 21–1060 Kemp and Others, Petitioner......
-
Owen Gallacher Petitioner
...although there have been a number of similar applications in the case of prosecutions in the High Court:e.g.H.M. Advocate v. HassonSC 1971 J.C. 35. The havers then moved for expenses. The motion was made by their counsel on the basis that they had been brought into court to answer the petit......
-
McLeod (Alistair) v HM Advocate (No.2)
...Lordships in the High Court of Justiciary for an order recalling Lord Coulsfield's decision. Cases referred to: Advocate (HM) v HassonSC 1971 JC 35 Advocate (HM) v Ward 1993 SLT 1202 Benendoun v FranceHRC (A/284) [1994] 18 EHRR 54 Downie v HM AdvocateSC 1952 JC 37 Edwards v United Kingdom (......