Whaley v Lord Watson
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 26 November 1999 |
| Date | 26 November 1999 |
| Docket Number | No 16 |
| Court | Court of Session (Outer House) |
OUTER HOUSE
Lord Johnston
Constitutional lawScottish ParliamentProceedings against memberCompetencyMember of Scottish Parliament proposing to introduce private member's Bill to outlaw certain blood sportsMember having registered his interests in organisation committed to abolition of hunting with dogsPrivate persons seeking to interdict member from introducing Bill on ground that member had accepted assistance from organisation in promoting BillWhether interdict competentScotland Act 1998 (cap 46), sec 40(3) and (4)1
InterdictInterim interdictTitle and interestMember of Scottish Parliament proposing to introduce private member's Bill to outlaw certain blood sportsMember having registered his interests in organisation committed to abolition of hunting with dogsPrivate persons seeking to interdict member from introducing Bill on ground that member had accepted assistance from organisation in promoting BillParliamentary standards committee having determined that member had not breached Parliamentary rules relating to interestsPetitioners averring that enactment of Bill would harm their patrimonial interestsWhether petitioners having title and interest to sue
Section 40 (3) of the Scotland Act 1998 enacts that in any proceedings against the Scottish Parliament the court shall not make an order for suspension, interdict, reduction or specific performance or any like order but may instead make a declarator. Subsection (4) enacts,inter alia, that in any proceedings against any member of the Parliament the court shall not make an order for suspension, interdict, reduction or specific performance or other like order if the effect of so doing would be to give any relief against the Parliament which could not have been given in proceedings against the Parliament.
The petitioners, whose livelihoods were to a large extent dependent on fox hunting in Scotland, sought interim interdict against a member of the Scottish Parliament against his introducing a private member's Bill to abolish hunting of mammals. The petitioners alleged (and the member admitted) that the member had registered his interests in an organisation which was formed to secure the abolition of hunting with dogs and that that organisation had provided legal and administrative assistance, drafting advice and a full-time researcher to the member in support of the Bill. The standards committee of the Scottish Parliament had determined that the member had not breached...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adams and Others v Lord Advocate
... ... Tre Traktîrer Aktiebolag v SwedenHRC (1989) 13 EHRR 309 Vogt v GermanyHRC (1995) 21 EHRR 205 Whaley v Lord WatsonSC 2000 SC 340 Wilson v Independent Broadcasting AuthoritySC 1979 SC 351 Wingrove v United ... In Whaley v Lord Watson the petitioners (one of whom was Mr Adams) were refused an interim interdict against Lord Watson of Invergowrie “from doing anything in his ... ...
-
Imperial Tobacco Limited V. The Lord Advocate As Representing The Scottish Ministers
... ... jurisprudence and that of Canada (and India), in the latter of which the expression "pith and substance" has a long history going back to Lord Watson's observations in Union Colliery Co of British Columbia Ltd v Bryden [1899] AC 580, at page 587. [31] On the other hand, the Canadian ... In this respect and in contrast to the position of the Westminster Parliament, the Scottish Parliament, as Lord President Rodger explained in Whaley v Watson 2000 SC 340 at 349D, is part of "that wider family of parliaments" which "owe their existence and powers to statute and are in various ... ...
-
Indep. J'ca Council for Human Rights (1988) Ltd et Al v President of Senate et Al
...principles of constitutional law support the right to ask the Court to pronounce on the validity of the legislative process. He cited Whaley v Lord Watson [2000] 5 L.R.C. 627 and Re 19 th Amendment to the Constitution [2003] 4 L.R.C. 290. In Whaley the Scottish Court of Session held that i......
-
Whaley v Lord Watson
...1999. At advising, on 26 November 1999, the Lord Ordinary refused interim interdict and dismissed the petition: seeWhaley v Lord WatsonSC 2000 SC 125. The petitioners reclaimed. ases referred to: Black v Fife Coal Co Ltd 1912 SC (HL) 33 Cutler v Wandsworth Stadium LtdELR [1949] AC 398 Graha......