HMIC criticises Scotland's Police Forces for ignoring the public

Its now the turn of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland to 'criticise' Scotland's Police Forces for seemingly ignoring the public.

The Herald reports :

Watchdog attacks police for ignoring the public

JULIA HORTON

Scotland's police routinely fail to give victims of crimes, witnesses and the public vital information on investigations, an official report has found.

Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland (HMICS) warned this failure meant forces are in danger of losing crucial help from the public in solving crimes, while the quality of service was suffering because officers were too busy focusing on target setting and other "performance management".

The report into how police dealt with contact from members of the public comes the day after Lothian and Borders Police was condemned by Scotland's police complaints commissioner for failing to respond properly to complainants.

Both reports mirror statistics revealing a growing public discontent across the country over poor police communication.

The inspectorate's report authors found "no recognisable standard" for providing feedback which was "rarely, if ever" published for people to see.

They stated: "We also considered the large number of calls made to the police to provide information, for example I've seen something suspicious' or I think you should know where these drug dealers are operating'.

"We found little evidence of any systematic approach to either following through this contact ... or capturing callers' views on how they had been dealt with. It appeared that very few were given any feedback, unless they were needed as witnesses. As a result, the service may be missing valuable opportunities to encourage further future contact from these members of the public."

They added: "It appeared to us that the service's focus on quality management had diminished recently. It may be that the increased emphasis on performance management, through process improvement and target-setting, has diverted attention from quality of service."

The inspectorate's review calls for a national minimum standard for feedback which should be published so people know what they should expect.

It also urged the Scottish Government to review the way the criminal justice system provides information to witnesses of crimes and victims, after branding the current approach "uncoordinated at best and confusing or duplicative at worst".

The most recent figures from Audit Scotland based on public opinion surveys by the police found that the number of people who were very or fairly satisfied with the way in which police dealt with them fell from almost 83% in 2000 to just over 77% in 2006.

Conversely, the number of people either very or fairly dissatisfied rose from 8.5% in 2000 to 14.4% in 2006.

The Assistant Inspector of Constabulary Malcolm Dickson yesterday stressed that the police did often provide good feedback and that officers were short on time.

He said: "We appreciate that individual officers are very busy, working 24-hour shifts, so we think giving feedback should be more of an organisational responsibility."

However he added: "This inspection was prompted by a widespread recognition within the police service that one of the weakest areas in its dealings with the public is a failure to provide updates or feedback on how an inquiry was progressing.

"During the inspection we confirmed this weakness."

Other recommendations in the HMICS report included putting a strong emphasis on good customer care when training new staff and making more use of mobile phones and e-mail to boost communication with the public.

Mr Dickson said there had been "tremendous" improvements in the way the private sector provides information to its customers and that the police service could not allow itself to fall behind.

The report author's also suggested that Victim Support Scotland could help provide feedback to crime victims.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland pledged to consider the report's recommendations and implement them "as appropriate".

The government also said it would look at recommendations and explore "what more can be done to improve information flow to victims".

History made as three female judges sit at Court of Session.

History made or business as usual .. whatever it is, its a first in Scots Law as three female judges take the bench on a case centering on a name dispute between two firms.

The Scotsman reports :

Fair ladies: first ever all-female bench

By JOHN ROBERTSON and EMILY GOSDEN

AS THE three judges took their places on the bench in the austere setting of the Court of Session in Edinburgh yesterday, their presence caused an unusual flurry of interest.

Roy Martin, QC, paused before proceedings commenced and said: "I hope my Ladies will not mind if I say what a privilege it is to open submissions in these historic circumstances."

The case of Wise Property Care Ltd (trading as White Preservation) against White Thomson Preservation Ltd and a dispute over the right to use the name would not normally have attracted such attention, except for it being the first time three female judges had sat together on the bench in Scotland.

But last night, legal bodies said the presence of Ladies Paton, Smith and Dorrian on the appeal court bench should not obscure the fact that Scotland's legal establishment is monopolised by men.

Scotland has 34 judges, with one place vacant. Of that number, only four are women, Lady Clark having joined Ladies Paton, Smith and Dorrian in 2006. The first appointment of a female judge, Lady Cosgrove, only came in 1996.

Two QCs, Sheriff Rita Rae and Morag Wise, serve as temporary judges. Of the 450 advocates practising, just 106 are female compared with 344 males.

Last month, the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland announced it was to carry out an investigation aimed at ending the male monopoly, and examining the barriers against women and people of ethnic minorities progressing into senior positions. Neil Stevenson, head of strategic change at the Law Society, gave yesterday's historic moment a cautious welcome.

"It's great to see a success story, but we have to be realistic: there are still some issues about women becoming partners and taking up judicial appointments. We at the Law Society need to keep campaigning," Mr Stevenson said. But he added: "There are more men than women retiring from the profession … we predict that by 2011 there will be more female than male lawyers."

Latest figures show that while women may not have reached the higher echelons in the legal professions, they are beginning to outnumber men in the early stages of the profession and are in the majority studying law at university. Law Society of Scotland figures for 2006 reveal that of the 10,152 practising solicitors, 4,490 were women compared with 5,662 men.

But the numbers of women qualifying as solicitors in Scotland between November 2006 and October 2007 reached 353 compared with only 199 men.

Amanda Jones, a partner at Maclay, Murray & Spens, said: "The simple fact of having an all-female court doesn't indicate that the balance of judges is neutral in its entirety.

"It's serendipitous that this should happen. It's not indicative of a bench that's gender- balanced. It's disappointing that in 2008 it's the first time for an all-female bench; there have been all-male benches for years and no-one's commented."

PROFILE

THE woman who paved the way as the first female judge in Scotland, Lady Cosgrove, was among the first to offer her congratulations on yesterday's events.

She said: "When I was first appointed, I always hoped and dreamed that women would be truly represented on the bench, and I am very happy to hear about the three-woman appeal court, because that is a step in the right direction."

It was as recently as 1996 that Hazel Aronson, QC, broke almost 500 years of male dominance with her elevation to the supreme courts bench.

Lady Cosgrove retired two years ago, and recalled in an interview with The Scotsman at the time: "I have just been in the right place at the right time, part of a generation of women for whom there have been no barriers and ... have been able to reach the heights in their chosen profession."

Law Society & vested interests lament passing of lawyers monopoly on access to justice - in three years ?

No sense in crying about it, but certainly the Law Society will have a few 'last stabs' at keeping the monopoly legal services market closed for another two or three years just for good measure.

That's another four billion pounds please Mr Kenny MacAskill .. who seems less & less interested in the public interest these days, who surely must be getting that 'taken for a ride' feeling from the lack of action on the Justice Secretary's part ...

The Scotsman reports :

The end of lawyers or a super new market?

Part two of our debate over the future of the Scottish legal profession

PROFESSOR GRAEME LAURIE, DIRECTOR OF SCRIPT, EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

TECHNOLOGICAL revolutions are shaping the lawyer of the future, requiring a new breed of professional trained to get to grips with cutting-edge developments. These include: Second Life (how do you convey real estate in cyberspace?), nanotechnology (are behaviour-enhancing micro-implants cheating?), synthetic biology (who will own new life forms built from biological scratch?) and mobile communications technologies (should our phones be used to spy on us?). These advances change the ways we live and interact with each other, and so require changes in the rules that govern these interactions.

New laws and new lawyers also require new law degrees. Edinburgh University is ahead of the game with its unique distance-learning Masters degrees in law and new technologies, offered via the internet and through its research centre, Script. The clear message for the future is that law, lawyers and the legal profession itself will need to evolve rapidly to keep pace with a social world that is increasingly typified by change driven by new and emerging technologies.

DOUGLAS CONNELL, JOINT SENIOR PARTNER, TURCAN CONNELL

THERE is likely to be a growing stratification of the way in which legal services are provided to individuals. At the top end – serving no more than 10 per cent of the Scottish population who continue to become increasingly affluent – there will be an increasing demand for personalised, competent and specialised advice from firms that provide relationship-based services. There is a particular opportunity for these services to be provided by multidisciplinary firms.

At the next level, some businesses will develop online commoditised services made available through a range of national brands. These will cover residential conveyancing transactions and lending, simple wills, straightforward probate work and some personal injury claims. Our "Google generation" is well accustomed to the call-centre, transaction-based approach and there are big opportunities for those willing to invest in the necessary technology and processes. The rise in the commoditisation of these bread-and-butter services will represent a real threat to the operation of many traditional high-street solicitors.

MAGNUS SWANSON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MACLAY MURRAY & SPENS

THERE is no doubt that the legal market in Scotland is changing and will continue to do so over the next five years. The direction and pace of this change will be dictated by the evolving needs of clients, as much as any structural reforms within the industry.

Clients coming to terms with globalisation increasingly look for lawyers who can support them in complex international deals, so successful Scottish firms will have to be capable of competing against the best in any national market. Establishing strong global links will become even more crucial in the battle to attract and retain the best clients and staff.

The Law Society's proposals for alternative business structures are another important issue. The debate must consider our need to compete with large English commercial law firms. Moves to open up funding or ownership of law firms can only exist within a sensible regulatory regime, retaining the professionalism and quality clients expect.

FARAH ADAMS, SOLICITOR, A & R ROBERTSON & BLACK

TO SURVIVE, the Scottish high-street solicitor will need to adapt. The proposed alternative structures, creating new entrants in the sector will increase competition. The public will continue to want assurance that legal issues are protected by client confidentiality and that no possible risk of a conflict of interest between their solicitor and another party exists. Independence of the solicitor will be paramount.

There will be less reliance on the nine-to-five availability of solicitors and more on the 24/7 availability of online information. This could allow clients to obtain updates wherever and whenever they need it and could benefit high street practices, particularly those in rural areas. The profile of the profession will continue to change as more women and hopefully more minority groups enter the law, thus reassuring the public that it is truly a profession that is representative of the society it serves.

JAMES MCMORROW, PARTNER AND SOCIAL HOUSING SPECIALIST, HARPER MACLEOD

THE provision of affordable housing is one of the major challenges facing Scottish society, The Scottish Government is looking to housing providers to increase housing supply so as to create greater choice and sustainable mixed communities within a context of better value for public expenditure. A key consequence of both higher house prices and the "credit crunch" is the exponential increase in the number of people – usually first-time buyers – who lack the resources to buy a house on the open market but do not qualify for social housing. One of the tasks of the Scottish Government in the next five years will be to ensure that the law facilitates progress. It is to be hoped that Holyrood will legislate to abolish the "securities rule" element of the "20-year rule" that currently impedes development. Matters could be further helped by an examination of consumer credit legislation.

BARRY LOVE, PARTNER OF THE WASTE GROUP, SEMPLE FRASER

THE two main drivers of environmental law in the next five years will be energy and waste. With politicians convinced of man-made global warming we can expect a plethora of low-carbon initiatives designed to wean us off fossil fuels.

Hand-in-hand with sensible energy use is waste avoidance and reuse. We still rely on the technological dead-end that is landfill. The smart money is moving into high-tech incineration, with combustion heat being used to create heating or electricity. These changes have already been legislated for, but new waste laws will mean that disposal options like landfill will only be for the most intractable industrial wastes. Along with waste laws, the new EU chemicals legislation is a major challenge and potentially affects every manufacturer (of anything – not just chemicals). Compliance costs will be massive, making it important to know when the law applies to you and when it doesn't.

LIZ MCROBB, PARTNER IN ENERGY AND UTILITIES, SHEPHERD+ WEDDERBURN

THE renewables sector is buoyant, largely thanks to challenging targets from the UK and Scottish governments. In addition, the proposed EU renewables directive will apply mandatory targets across the EU. For renewables developers and the government there is an increasing need to get consents issued and megawatts built as efficiently as possible. The construction needed is immense, but there are challenges over and above the technical skills needed to develop major renewables infrastructure.

Developers cannot connect to the grid without permission from National Grid and it is the legal and regulatory barriers to appropriate grid capacity that are a major block to development of infrastructure in the UK. The economic downturn emphasises the need for positive leadership at a senior government level, and within the regulator Ofgem, to remove unnecessary red tape and allow developers to deliver on government targets.

OLIVER ADAIR, CONVENER OF THE LAW SOCIETY'S LEGAL AID COMMITTEE

HOW legal aid will look in five years time will depend on what happens over the next 18 months. On the criminal side, changes to summary justice will raise challenges for the profession and result in altered business models to meet the challenges of a faster, more efficient justice system.

In solemn cases, while recent changes have resulted in increased remuneration, the starting position was so outdated that we will continue to persuade the Government that rates need to be regularly reassessed. It might also be time to open up a debate on universal rights of audience.

In civil legal aid, despite the announcement of a rise in funding, the position is acute. In some parts of the country, the Government has had to employ advisors where solicitors could not sustain a business unit. Lord Gill's review may result in changes to civil justice; however, we cannot do nothing in the short or medium term.

DONALD REID, PARTNER, MITCHELLS ROBERTON AND SCOTSMAN COLUMNIST

LAST week I was involved in paying off the mortgage on a client's property. I phoned the bank to find out how to word the discharge document. This was a mistake. I had to fight through endless digitised options and made 13 phone calls before sorting things out. Here's my worry about so-called "Tesco law": if it had been the client himself who had had to make the same enquiry he would have got nowhere. Now suppose it was the bank itself that operated his solicitor's firm. If he had made enquiry out of the blue he would have hit the same problems with his solicitor, whose files would have been absorbed into the monolithic maw of the bank. Only this time he would have had no one to sort it out for him. His solicitor would now be part of the problem. The impossibility of getting sensible treatment to telephone enquiries by large institutions is one of the great frustrations of our age. Tesco Law will make this worse. But like global warming, no one will care about it until it is too late.

JENNIFER VEITCH, SCOTSMAN COLUMNIST

The End of Lawyers seems like a provocative title, designed to boost Richard Susskind's book sales. But does he have a point?

No-one would suggest that, in the future, there won't be rules to be interpreted. People will still need legal advice, but will they need it from lawyers? When paralegals and the advice sector currently play a big role in providing legal services, the answer, already, is no. With the advent of alternative business structures, the market is likely to open up to include others who can help run legal services. All this will take time. Now that the Law Society's proposals have been ratified, the Scottish Government will need to come up with a blueprint, consult and get legislation through parliament. The profession will need some time to adapt to the changes before they can implement them. So five years from now, little may have changed, but the ground will certainly be shifting under firms that still cling to the traditional way of working

Lord Hamilton - Secret Lockerbie documents must be handed over

Lord Hamilton rules the 'secret documents' in the Lockerbie case appeal must be handed over to be viewed by three judges in " closed session".

BBC News reports :

Lockerbie document handover order

The Lord Justice General has ordered the handover of secret documents linked to the Lockerbie bombing to be viewed by three judges in "closed session".

Lord Hamilton said the papers should be produced to the court within seven days subject to appropriate security.

Judges will then hear the objections to the documents being handed to lawyers for Abdelbasset Ali al-Megrahi.

Agreement has not been reached as to how the man convicted of the bombing should be represented at proceedings.

The decision came at the end of a three-day procedural hearing at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh.

It is preparing the way for Al Megrahi's second appeal against his conviction for the 1988 atrocity.

The UK Government has argued that handing over the documents is not in the national interest.

However, lawyers for Al Megrahi have said it could be important in his appeal.

Lord Hamilton said judges would take a "stage by stage, pragmatic approach" to the issue but made some orders immediately.

The first was that the advocate general should produce copies of the document in question to the court.

Security-vetting

"That should be done, subject to appropriate security arrangements being in place, within seven days," he said.

Three judges in "closed session" will then hear the objections to the handover of the documents.

Lord Hamilton said that hearing would not deal with the question of whether the Crown had any obligation to show the document to Al Megrahi's lawyers.

He added that proposals for a security-vetted advocate to represent the Libyan would be studied in due course.

"Once we have examined the documents further decisions in this matter will be given by the court," he said.

Scots to wait three years or more for legal services reform under MacAskill

Title says it all .. most sensible lawyers are quite happy to usher in the new opened legal services market, although the Law Society of Scotland certainly is not, fearing it will signal their demise which has long been hoped for by the majority of the membership.

The only catch - the public will have to wait at least three years before the SNP Government does anything about it, and with Kenny MacAskill as Justice Secretary, the Law Society can surely be guaranteed a few more years of squeezing every penny it can get out of clients at the expense of the profession's bad good reputation.

A new page in three years or more delays ?

The Scotsman reports :

Inside law: Legal advice with your cornflakes

By Michael Howie

IT'S a centuries-old tradition that has ensured Scotland's lawyers have held an elevated and privileged status in society.

But the monopoly the legal profession has over the ownership of law firms has, for some, become more a hindrance than a benefit.

Many of the big corporate firms worry that they are losing out to their rivals south of the Border, who have already swept away restrictions over the market. That means they can now attract more capital from outside the legal industry, allowing them to expand and net bigger contracts.

Now Scotland wants to do the same. Earlier this month, the Law Society of Scotland voted overwhelmingly to break the monopoly solicitors have over the ownership of legal firms in Scotland.

I understand that the Scottish Government will bring forward legislation within three years that will change the legal landscape. A senior government source has told me it is likely that historic proposals will be introduced to parliament in the current term.

But will the ordinary person in the street notice any difference? The answer is a resounding … "probably".

Breaking the monopoly will open the way to competition from supermarkets and banks. That is why it has been dubbed "Tesco Law". People will, theoretically, be able to buy legal advice when they're getting the groceries in.

Already, the AA and the Co-op have moved to establish legal services companies in England, where legislation has been introduced to open up the market, and will be enacted in 2010.

Conveyancing and will-writing are among the legal services that other organisations such as supermarkets will be able to provide.

One legal source tells me practices like solicitors relying on letters to maintain formal contact with clients – which can be a costly business – will be swept away, to be replaced by more practical methods of communication, such as e-mail.

The fear among lawyers is that the market will become too unregulated, with the possibility of conflict of interest and plain bad practice leaving consumers worse off. As one solicitor to whom I spoke put it: "Do people really want to buy legal services when they're getting their cornflakes?"

Maybe not. But one thing's for sure: the legal industry will never be the same again.

Scottish Parliament plans more generous pensions for MSPs

One thing the Scottish Parliament is good at is voting itself as much money as possible .. and in an example of this policy, MSPs are considering changes to their pensions system to give themselves that little bit extra ...

BBC News reports :

Holyrood pension changes proposed

Pay-offs for MSPs are to made more generous under plans drawn up by a Holyrood committee.

It has proposed doubling the resettlement grant for some of the longest serving parliamentarians.

MSPs who lose their seats are at present paid a lump sum related to age - but that no longer complies with discrimination laws.

Costs would be offset by cuts to the pensions of future first ministers and presiding officers.

The proposals still have to be agreed by the Scottish Parliament.

Under existing rules MSPs who lose their seats would receive between half and three quarters of their salary.

Increased contributions

But the Scottish Parliamentary Pension Scheme Committee has now proposed MSPs voted out after three or more terms should get a full year's salary, worth £53,000 - which would double the value of the grant to some members.

The committee's proposed changes to pension arrangements to give MSPs the option of accruing future benefits at either 1/50 or 1/40 of their final salary.

At present, MSPs' pensions are based on 1/50 of their final salary for each year of service, and a 6% contribution rate.

The extra cost of the latter option should be met by increasing the contribution rate to 11%, it was recommended.

The committee also proposed that future first ministers and presiding officers should receive a one-off resettlement grant of six months salary, as well as an entitlement to their MSP's pension.

Prosecutors float partial disclosure deal in Lockerbie secrets case

Moves to break the impasse in the Lockerbie appeal by the prosecutors, who now suggest they will accept partial disclosure of the secret documents now at the centre of Abdelbasset al-Megrahi's appeal

BBC News reports :

Move to disclose Lockerbie papers

Prosecutors have said they would accept partial disclosure of secret documents in the Lockerbie bombing appeal as long as national security was not at risk.

Abdelbasset al-Megrahi's legal team wants access to the paperwork to assist with his appeal against conviction.

However, the UK Government has argued that releasing the documents would be against the national interest.

Crown counsel Ronald Clancy QC said "limited disclosure" might be a way to allow the papers to be examined.

Megrahi is currently serving a jail term for the 1988 atrocity in which 270 people died.

I don't understand the Advocate General to have ruled out limited disclosure at this stage - Ronald Clancy QC Advocate depute

The Libyan has already lost one appeal but has been granted a second by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.

His legal team has been trying to see the secret papers which they believe could help overturn his conviction.

However, Foreign Secretary David Miliband has signed a public interest immunity certificate, claiming making the document public could cause "real harm" to national security and international relations.

A hearing is now under way in Edinburgh to decide on the best way to deal with the documents.

Mr Clancy told the court that limited disclosure - by means of a summary - might be the way forward.

"The principle about involving the defence to the maximum extent looms large here," he said.

"The lord advocate is mindful of the difficulty that the petitioner would have in bringing a ground of appeal without even limited disclosure."

Security-vetted

He acknowledged that the advocate general, who represents the UK Government in legal matters north of the border, may be "less enthusiastic" about the idea.

"I don't understand the advocate general to have ruled out limited disclosure at this stage," he added.

On Tuesday, Advocate General Lord Davidson QC asked the court to hold a hearing behind closed doors to discuss the confidential document.

He suggested a security-vetted advocate could represent Megrahi's interests at that hearing to replace his usual defence team.

Margaret Scott QC, senior counsel for the Libyan, has criticised those plans.

"Megrahi's position here is that he wants disclosure of these documents in order to exercise his right of appeal," she said.

"My main concern is any proposed procedure which determines the substance of the appeal taking part in the absence of Megrahi or his defence counsel."

MacAskill praises Law Society market rigging, monopoly & complaints fixing

While many talk of the vote to open the legal services market, most missed the fact that free market reform resistors such as the Justice Secretary will sit back and take around three years to actually bring forward legislation to implement those so sought after access to justice reforms.

Indeed, Mr MacAskill spent last week attending a party rally conference hosted by the Law Society where he could do nothing but praise the profession.

If you can stomach reading about the speech here it is as the Scotsman reports :

MacAskill praises forward thinking

By Jennifer Veitch

Embracing new business structures is just the first step, the next could be 24-hour access and a legal Facebook, reports Jennifer Veitch

AFTER all the "will they, won't they" angst about alternative business structures (ABS), the Law Society's annual conference kicked off on an uncharacteristically positive note on Friday.

Richard Henderson, the society's president, seemed in an almost chipper mood as he began proceedings by hailing the "really quite historic decision" taken at the AGM the previous day.

He had considerable reason to be cheerful. The vote to accept the society's policy paper on ABS had been passed by an overwhelming majority – around nine to one in favour.

And so – if you set aside the significant minority who still worry that so-called "Tesco law" will damage access to justice and put small firms at risk – for once at least, it seems that the society was leading the charge on change.

In his opening speech to conference, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill was effusive in his praise for the profession. The minister expressed his gratitude, stating that he was "hugely encouraged" by the society's forward-looking response, and promising to bring forward detailed legislative proposals on ABS as soon as parliamentary time allowed. He even stuck a cherry on top by announcing some extra money for legal aid.

"We have come further together than might have seemed possible only a few years ago," he added. "Both the Law Society and the Faculty have proved they can lead change when change is required."

Bearing in mind the rather fractious relationship that lawyers had with the previous administration, it seemed not only constructive, but almost cosy. Then again, having a consensus on a policy paper is one thing; taking forward changes that could transform the way the profession works is another.

At the conference, there were signs that the profession – currently grappling not only with ABS, but a consultation on standards, the transition to a new complaints handling system, the introduction of the regulation of paralegals and a review of legal education, as well as the biggest ever review of the Scottish civil courts system – is perhaps not as well-placed as it might be to modernise.

Professor Richard Susskind's speech highlighted the need that he perceived for lawyers to become more client-focused, with more efficient services. This would involve "decomposing" legal work, he said, with lawyers only performing those tasks that really needed their skills and talents.

He added that, in the future, lawyers would still be needed when clients need "deep expertise", but he predicted that roles would evolve into specialist niches such as trusted advisers, legal knowledge engineers, legal project managers and legal risk managers.

Where Susskind's vision of the future started to wake up the audience however, was in his assessment of the impact of new – and existing – technology.

There were audible groans when he predicted that the market would soon demand 24-hour access to lawyers, and what might well have been a stunned silence when he said that in five years, "the equivalent of Facebook will be a fundamental way of communicating with clients." When Susskind asked the conference delegates if they had used Facebook, only one tentative hand could be seen rising through the gloom of the conference hall. "I am on there, if you want a friend," he quipped.

His predictions on the scale of technology growth were enough to boggle even the best legal brains. In 20 years, he said, the average PC will have the power of a human brain; in 50 years, the power equivalent to the brain power of whole of humanity. By then, he joked, "it might be time for lawyers to change their working practices".

While most of the middle-aged lawyers in the conference hall won't have much cause to worry about the state of the Scottish legal services market in 2058, Susskind had a serious point to make.

Expenses changes in the Court of Session after personal injury claim success

Changes to the expenses regime in the Court of Session after a personal injury case in which the action was settled for £2,500, and the court then asked by the defenders to award expenses at the sheriff court scale.

The Scotsman reports :

Summary change to expenses

By JOHN ROBERTSON

THE case of Hylands v Glasgow City Council was no different from so many other personal injury actions, but it could turn out to be the claim which heralds an end to a blight on the country's supreme civil court.

Ann Hylands, a clerical assistant with the council, was not badly hurt when a partition fell and struck her back. Her case for compensation was straightforward, yet it was raised in the Court of Session, and gave fodder to those who believe that judges in the highest court should have their time and brains exercised by more taxing issues than low-value reparation.

The Court of Session has introduced simplified procedures for personal injury actions and made it a more attractive forum than the local sheriff courts. So, as long as the initial claim was for more than £1,500 – below which a case went to the sheriff court – lawyers from all over Scotland have headed to Edinburgh.

One way of discouraging the trend would have been to award only sheriff court expenses in cases where the sum ultimately recovered, by an out-of-court settlement or an award by a judge, was small by Court of Session standards, and more in keeping with the sheriff court.

However, judges in a number of cases, where the sums recovered had been between £1,450 and £3,400, found themselves unable or unwilling to impose the expenses sanction. How could you blame someone, they asked, for taking advantage of the Court of Session's procedures, often resulting in a quicker outcome?

Now, the Hylands case has seen a reversal in thinking. The action settled for £2,500, and Lord Drummond Young was asked by the council to award expenses at the sheriff court scale.

He said: "The level of expenses in a (sheriff court) summary cause is substantially less than that found in the Court of Session. The clear intention underlying the legislation increasing the privative jurisdiction and the financial limit for summary causes is that claims of small value should proceed as summary causes in the sheriff court and not in the Court of Session.

"In my opinion, those changes have important implications for the level of expenses that may be recovered in the Court of Session … the expenses awarded to a pursuer who recovers a sum significantly below the limit of the privative jurisdiction should normally be modified to the summary cause scale without certification for counsel."

Lord Drummond Young said exceptions would exist, and he found that, in the Hylands case, the Court of Session summons had been prepared before the increase in the sheriff court limit, and served just after the new limit came into force. He refused to modify the expenses.

"I would emphasise, however, that that decision is made on the very specific circumstances of the present case. If similar facts were to occur in future, I am of opinion that in the absence of special circumstances, it would be appropriate to modify the pursuer's expenses," he added.

Edinburgh legal firm Turcan Connell caught up in Minto family inheritance scandal

It is reported today in Scotland on Sunday that Lady Caroline Minto, who is currently writing her memoirs as the Dowager Countess and former wife of the late 6th Earl of Minto, is to fight a court case against the late earl's executors – his son, the present 7th Earl, better known as businessman Timothy Melgund, and Edinburgh solicitor Douglas Connell.

The late Earl's estate has allegedly fallen on bad times, and Executor Douglas Connell, senior partner in the well known Edinburgh legal firm of Turcan Connell, claims there is no money left to pay the inheritance to Lady Minto, as the story goes.

Readers may well recall an earlier tale where Messrs Turcan Connell were embroiled in a story relating to a legal bill from Turcan Connell wiping out the net assets of an estate .. so no stranger to controversy then, and unsurprisingly, the Law Society of Scotland whitewashed rejected the complaint.

Why do people bother appointing lawyers as Executors to their estates when more often than not it causes these same problems ?

Some free advice for non-lawyer readers - never appoint a solicitor or legal agent as the executor of your will !

Scotland on Sunday reports :

Lady Minto lifts lid on bitter legacy

By Martin Hannan

ONE of Scotland's leading aristocratic families has been split by a bitter feud over the non-payment of a six-figure legacy to the Dowager Countess and former wife of the late 6th Earl of Minto.

The row threatens to explode as the Dowager Countess, Lady Caroline Minto, is currently writing "tell-all" memoirs in a bid to raise cash to fund a court case against the late earl's executors – his son, the present 7th Earl, better known as businessman Timothy Melgund, and Edinburgh solicitor Douglas Connell.

Melgund and Connell say they cannot honour the legacy as there is no money left from her former husband's estate to pay her. Under Scots law, executors do not have to make payments to beneficiaries if the deceased's estate cannot afford it.

Lady Minto says she will ask the courts to rule that more £200,000 worth of assets transferred by her husband to the family's Minto Trust should be returned to his estate in order to pay the legacy.

The row over the will has revealed deep divisions within the House of Minto. Melgund, the chief executive of Paperchase, has accused his stepmother of deserting his father when he became ill some years before his death in September, 2005, an accusation she denies.

Lady Minto, the former nurse and model Caroline Larlham, married the 6th Earl, Gilbert Edward George Lariston Elliot-Murray-Kynynmound, in 1991 when he was 63 and she was 39. The Old Etonian and former Scots Guards officer Gibbie Elliot, as he was known to his friends, was convener of Borders Regional Council from 1990 until 1996.

Lady Minto's memoirs are expected to tell an extraordinary story of how she rose from being adopted at birth to becoming a Countess. It was love at first sight when she met the widowed earl at an art exhibition – he dropped his spectacles, and she picked them up. They were married within months.

But Lord and Lady Minto divorced in 2004 after 14 years together, during which time Earl's condition deteriorated to the point where he needed permanent oxygen treatment.

Lady Minto, who now lives in a small flat in Italy, says her husband's health and wealth were ruined by the long battle over the family seat near Hawick.

Her book will also detail her acrimonious estrangement from some of the Minto family.

"None of them even phoned me to tell me he was dead," she said. "A butcher in Hawick phoned to offer his condolences, and I didn't even know he was dead."

The Dowager Countess was left £100,000 in the will but she has been paid only £10,000 after her solicitors tackled the executors. Lady Minto has now been told that the late Earl's estate was valued at £151,000 but that after deducting expenses, taxes and £40,000 legal fees, there is nothing left to pay the £90,000 balance of the legacy.

Lady Minto, 55, says that in 2001, her late husband signed over personal holdings worth £300,000 to the Minto Trust, in which the Elliot family's assets were invested. The trustees include Melgund and Connell.

She claims that after deductions for his care and £1,000 per month living expenses payments, the trust still has more than £200,000-worth of the late Earl's wealth which she says should go back into his personal estate.

"I believe the executors have at least a moral duty to recover and sell some of my late husband's assets and pay my legacy," said Lady Minto.

She claims those assets included two paintings attributed to French Old Master Jean-Antoine Watteau – another of his works is up for auction at Christie's in London next month for a minimum of £3m.

No paintings by Watteau are listed in the inventory of the estate, which does include numerous valuable artworks and Georgian silverware.

A spokeswoman for Douglas Connell and Turcan Connell said: "Client confidentiality is at the heart of the Turcan Connell ethos and as a total rule we never make comment on any aspect of client business.

"If Lady Minto wishes to take the matter further then she should instruct her lawyers to contact us."

Timothy Melgund, who lives in Wiltshire, said: "My ex-stepmother deserted my father when he became bedridden and ill. He was then supported by the local authority until I managed to have him moved into a home where he became very happy again and unfortunately died in 2005.

"I hadn't seen my ex-stepmother for many years before that and this sort of interference that she is now coming up with is not particularly pleasant.

"The perception that my family is a rich family is just a nonsense, I'm afraid. My father left a legacy in his will but he just did not have that amount of money."

Asked about his feelings about the Dowager Countess, Melgund said: "This is a rather sad tale of a man who was married to a lady for a pretty short period of his life and when he became frail to the point where he couldn't support himself, she deserted him."

He firmly denied there were paintings such as the two alleged Watteaus held by the trust.

"The idea that these Watteaus were worth £3m or indeed that they were Watteaus is just fantasy," said Melgund.

"They had Watteau written on the frame. But they weren't. If they had been genuine Watteaus they would have been sold many, many years ago."

Friends of Lady Minto say they are shocked at the accusation of desertion. "She was definitely with Gibbie when I visited them several times in 2002-2003," said Frances Anderson, "even though Gibbie was in very poor health. Caroline was devoted to Gibbie."

Jane Martin, Lord Minto's carer in his final months before entering a nursing home, added: "Lord and Lady Minto were devoted to each other."

and just for comparison here is an earlier story, from the Herald newspaper where Messrs Turcan Connell were caught in an earlier scandal involving a 'ruined' estate ...

Legal bill wipes out net assets

IAIN MORSE and SIMON BAIN January 02 2007

A leading Edinburgh law firm which charged fees of more than £16,000 to administer an estate with net assets of under £14,000 has had a complaint against it to the Law Society of Scotland rejected.

The complaint was made by widow Dr Kate Forrest, a lecturer in Russian in Edinburgh, against Turcan Connell, the multi-disciplinary firm which prides itself on its “family office”.

Forrest complained that the firm had told her only that it would charge £200 an hour, had entered into unnecessary work, and had failed to give her estimates, or issue itemised bills, despite repeated requests. She claims the firm then gave an undertaking to halt the charges, in a meeting with witnesses at the firm’s office, but this did not materialise.

When the Law Society examined the complaint, it ruled that the meeting could not be taken into account as the firm had no record of it, and it accepted an explanation by managing partner Douglas Connell that the complaint had been based entirely on a “misunderstanding”.

The £16,000 in charges had the effect of more than wiping out any assets in the estate, which had gross assets of £69,574 but debts of £55,731.

The Law Society reported that the firm had “apologised for the oversight” in billing, and that “simple oversight … should not be defined as inadequate professional service”.

In November, Jane Irvine, the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, issued a rare public rebuke to the Law Society over its handling of complaints, urging it to “recognise that the consumer age has dawned”.

The Scottish Executive is poised to scrap self-regulation by the profession, policed by the ombudsman, and introduce a Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which the society is fiercely resisting.

The number of complaints received by the Law Society of Scotland has shot up from 2402 during 2002 to 4849 last year. The 12-page annual report of the society’s Client Relations Office records 1057 cases in which no action was taken at all last year, while in 108 cases a solicitor’s conduct was found unsatisfactory.

The current procedure starts with a reference to the law firm against which the complaint is made, and internal procedures to be followed by firms are laid down by the society. Only after these are exhausted can complainants proceed to the Law Society itself. And then, perhaps surprisingly, complainants can be charged by the law firm for their work in submitting the relevant evidence to the society.

The evidence regarded as acceptable by the society may be limited only to the files presented by the law firm, though it can order the production of “missing”documents - such as the record of a meeting. If a complaint is rejected by the society, the complainants have recourse to the courts. But this means finding a law firm prepared to act against another firm - which as The Herald has reported can be difficult in Edinburgh - at a minimum cost of several thousand pounds, a considerable disincentive to taking legal action.

Kate Forrest says she is left with no choice but to go to court if she wishes to challenge an outstanding fee in excess of £8000. She says: “For me this would be expensive and risky. I am not rich and they know this very well.”

The Law Society of Scotland said: “A complaint about a fee could be service or conduct as it could result from a breach of a rule if there was no letter of engagement, or IPS (inadequate professional service) if there was insufficient communication about a fee with a client.

“If a client feels a fee is too much then it can be referred to the Auditor of Court who can decide what a reasonable fee might be. Firms may also charge for providing a bill which itemises each letter, phone call, etc, especially if it is for a large volume of work.

“If someone takes a court action against a solicitor then the society is not involved in that process.”

Turcan Connell said: “We care deeply about ensuring that we give every client the best possible service. Our trust and tax experts are among the most proficient in Scotland, and we always strive to protect our clients’ interests and minimise their costs as far as possible.

“Dr Forrest is no longer a client. We resolutely protect the privacy of all current and former clients, and would not make any public comment on an individual’s personal circumstances or relationship with us.”

First Minister orders study of truth & reconciliation commission after law lords refuse abuse cases

It takes 'the man' himself to move on justice issues in Scotland it seems, leaving Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill well & truly in the shade as First Minster Alex Salmond moves to assure he will not turn his back on victims of abuse who had their hopes for justice thrown out by the House of Lords last week.

Well that's good. Its about time someone did something on justice, since the Justice Secretary isn't doing a thing ... and we here at Scottish Law Reporter firmly support the idea of Truth & Reconciliation to be implemented in many areas of injustice. Lets hope the First Minister carries on where others have failed ...

The Sunday Mail reports :

Abuse victims' pain as law lords deny them justice

May 25 2008 By Marion Scott

ALEX SALMOND has pledged to find a "way forward" for abuse victims whose hopes for justice were dashed by the House of Lords last week.

First Minister Salmond has told his officials to study Ireland's truth and reconciliation commission after the decision last week.

His spokesman said: "He has given his assurances that he will not turn his back on these victims.

"The Scottish Government will give careful consideration on how best to take these matters forward."

A test case had been brought by Jacqueline Whitton, 55, and Adeline Bowden, 45, who claimed to have been abused by nuns at Nazareth House in Cardonald, Glasgow, in the 1960s. But five law lords agreed with the Court of Session decision not to allow their £50,000 claim. The ruling will hit thousands of similar claims.

Jacqueline called the decision "a victory for the devil".

The ruling is a blow to victims, who must make a claim within three years of turning 18.

It means even those who had proved abuse would not receive Legal Aid funding.

The Irish government passed laws to re-categorise abuse victims as having a disability so they could get round the timebar on claims.

Former First Minister Jack McConnell said yesterday: "Legal technicalities shouldn't get in the way of justice. I am calling on the First Minister to explain what they will do."

But some victims accuse McConnell of betrayal after he failed to take action in 2004.

Lawyer Cameron Fyfe said: "When he apologised to victims four years ago, he should have taken the steps the Irish government did. But he didn't."

Jacqueline Whitton Beaten by nuns

JACQUELINE claims she suffered years of beatings and mental torment by Poor Sisters of Nazareth nuns at Nazareth House in Glasgow. Careworker Jacqueline, 55, from Paisley, said: "I wonder who commits the greater sin - judges, abusers or those who stood by."

She turned to Cardinal Thomas Winning, who offered support, and she believes if he had not died in 2001, the Church would have said sorry.

She said: "I was incensed when I heard Archbishop Mario Conti on TV defending the nuns after Sister Alphonso was prosecuted in Aberdeen eight years ago.

"He described victims as chasing a pot of gold being dangled by lawyers.

"It was such a gross betrayal of children like me."

Sister Alphonso, whose real name is Marie Docherty, was found guilty of four charges of cruelty against young girls.

James Morris Raped by teacher

AS a nine-year-old at St Margaret's Children's Home in Elie, Fife, James was raped by housemaster David Murphy.

Murphy abused 40 kids and died in 2003, months into a 15-year jail sentence.

James, 55, won £75000 compensation because Fife Council decided not to use time limit as a defence.

He said: "The Lords' ruling is a kick in the teeth. There is no timebar on our suffering."

Arthur McEwan Beaten by monk

ARTHUR, 54, sued Brother Benedict - real name Michael Murphy - for years of beatings at St Ninian's List D school in Gartmore, Stirlingshire, run by De La Salle monks.

But he will not receive the £50,000 award as Murphy took a vow of poverty.

Arthur, of Sauchie, Clackmannanshire, said: "I only hope our new First Minister will make the changes we need to reclaim our lives."

David Whelan Abused by teacher

DAVID suffered years of sex attacks by 'Beast in the Belltower' John Porteous at Quarrier's children's village, Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire.

In 2002, Porteous, 75, was jailed for eight years - reduced to five on appeal.

David, 49, said: "Holocaust victims weren't time barred so why are we?

"My case was proved in court yet this ruling denies me compensation. It's not only unfair, it's perverse."

Unqualified interpreters used by Courts & Fiscals causing miscarriage of justice

In further rumblings over the use of unqualified and unskilled translation services, it appears to be the case that Scotland may be seeing widespread miscarriages of justice because interpreters for migrant defendants & witnesses are not up to scratch.

It seems the Scottish Court Service and Crown Office are both knowingly using employees who are unqualified to perform their work ... something which perhaps might keep up the quotas for successful prosecutions .. perish the thought ... and what about checking up on other 'employees' of the Fiscals & Sheriff Clerks .. all got their qualifications up to scratch too ? hmmm indeed ...

The Sunday Herald reports :

Justice system compromised by unqualified interpreters

Fears of miscarriages in cases involving migrants
By John Bynorth Home Affairs Editor

SCOTLAND COULD be seeing miscarriages of justice because sheriff clerks and procurators fiscal are using unqualified linguists as interpreters for migrant defendants and witnesses in the courts, the Sunday Herald can reveal.

The Scottish Court Service and Crown Office are allowing foreign students without the industry benchmark Diploma in Public Service Interpreting (DPSI) to work, through approved agencies, as interpreters in cases ranging from custody disputes to serious assaults, including an alleged rape.

The rising number of migrants appearing before the court has led to a greater need for foreign-language speakers. Interpreters working without the qualification - described by the Chartered Institute of Linguists as "indispensable" - are being used to plug the shortfall.

The Sunday Herald has evidence that fiscals and sheriff clerks are routinely using unqualified freelance linguists provided by Scotland's largest interpreting agency, Alpha Translating and Interpreting. Solicitors, court officials and qualified interpreters have raised fears that mistakes are being made that could lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals.

Edinburgh-based Alpha promises high-quality trained staff and "24-hour coverage, 365 days a year". It provides staff to 50 courts, as well as the Scottish government, the NHS, police forces, local authorities and football clubs.

Two years ago, an assault trial at Wick sheriff court involving a Polish accused and a number of Polish prosecution witnesses collapsed because of mistakes made by an inexperienced interpreter. She did not have the DPSI and had not even started the one-year training course that leads to the diploma.

Aberdeen-based defence lawyer Taco Nolf is so concerned about the quality of some interpreters supplied by Alpha, which is approved by the Scottish Court Service and Crown Office Procurator Fiscal, that he has hired his own interpreter to ensure that evidence is being accurately translated.

Nolf, who represented the defendant, Wojciech Wszolek, in the Wick case, has objected to Alpha's interpreters in court, claiming they didn't possess the proper qualifications, did not hold relevant UK degrees or had questionable English.

He said: "An uncommonly large number of court interpreters come from Alpha. They are often unqualified and incompetent. The girl who sank the Wick trial was still working for them six months later.

"It is not good enough for an agency to say that the interpreter is a native speaker of Polish and that he is fluent in English. It does not make him or her a competent interpreter."

Wszolek said he is still angry about the linguist's errors that led to the case collapsing, as he believes the proceedings left him with a stain on his character.

He was cleared in June 2006 after the Alpha interpreter missed out words in translating a witness statement. Sheriff Gordon Fleetwood halted proceedings and deserted the case after being told by Nolf that the interpreter was "entirely unqualified as a translator" as she did not have the diploma, although she had a master's degree in English.

Nolf said he sympathised with the difficulties the courts face in hiring translators for the growing number of cases involving migrants who can speak only their native language, but that he was shocked that many of those hired lack the necessary skills.

Anna Kocela, 29, the interpreter in the aborted Wick case, is working for Alpha while studying for the DPSI, which she expects to pass next year.

She insists there is no question about her English-speaking ability, but says she is often "embarrassed" by the behaviour of some colleagues at Edinburgh sheriff court, who, she claimed, don't understand the Scottish legal system.

Kocela, a former English teacher in her native Poland, said: "Loads of Polish people come here and say they can speak English, but interpreting and speaking English are totally different.

"There's loads of people who are simply taken from the streets, without any qualifications, that haven't been checked on properly."

She said some colleagues were unprofessional in touting themselves around three or more agencies every day to profit from court work, where rates are typically £11 an hour after the agency's fee has been taken off.

Another interpreter had been working for Alpha recently in Edinburgh District Court with only a degree in English from a Polish university. The 30-year-old told the Sunday Herald she was able to gain the work because of her previous experience as an interpreter with the city council.

However, she appeared confused about whether she had worked in the sheriff or district courts when questioned by the Sunday Herald and incorrectly described the system as being "just like the Polish courts".

Another Pole, who is studying business at university and doesn't hold the DPSI, boasted that he covers anything up to 150 sheriff court cases and could potentially earn £1000 a month.

The 24-year-old worked for Alpha after passing a course in English for business run by an accredited private language specialist, and graduated in business studies from a UK university as part of a student exchange programme.

He revealed that he earned £50 for a two-hour interview at Perth police station on behalf of a Polish alleged rape victim on one of his very first assignments last year after Alpha could find no suitable female interpreters.

The man, who spoke broken English, said: "I wasn't quite sure I could manage the rape case, and knew it would be difficult, but she was fine with me.

"Alpha asked for the DPSI, but my English is good enough and I was about to graduate so they gave me work."

Tayside Police said the rape interview would have been re-arranged if the alleged victim had requested a female interpreter to be present.

Cetty Zambrano of the Chartered Institute of Linguists, which set up a national register of public service interpreters in an attempt to improve the quality of linguists, said the DPSI is an indispensable qualification if people want to work as an interpreter in the public service. But the Institute revealed that in three years, only 150 people have sat the diploma's Scottish legal option exam, which is preferred by the courts and Crown Office.

Zambrano added: "The law courts don't demand the diploma because the national agreement isn't even law. Things need tightening up."

A Crown Office spokesperson said: "The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service interpreting contract states that interpreters should have the Diploma in Public Service Interpreting (Scottish Legal Option) and recent experience of both consecutive and simultaneous interpreting in the court context.

"Where an interpreter does not have the DPSI qualification, it may still be possible and appropriate to use them if, for example, they have other relevant qualifications or the agency can provide us with evidence of the interpreter's recent relevant experience."

Alpha, which refused to say how many of its interpreters are unqualified, said in a statement that while the introduction of tendering contracts had improved standards of court interpreting, the "very nature" of freelance work is "a barrier in its own right" to improving the quality of linguists it uses.

"Without a career path, and the potential for viable income generation, there is no incentive to study," it said.

MacAskill seeks Head of Investigations for 'independent' lawyers complaints commission

The new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which is currently under investigation over allegations of sleaze in ministerial appointments made by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, is advertising for the position of "Head of Investigations".

Goodness ... could it be that yet another connected with the legal profession in some nefarious way will get the fat cat £1400 per week salaried position ?

If you feel like earning £1400 per week for whitewashing investigating lawyers, call or email Kenny MacAskil ... £1400 per week could help with that heavy mortgage or 4th house in the sun ....

Scottish Government - Head of Investigations

SLCC: SCOTTISH LEGAL COMPLAINTS COMMISSION

At times, we all have to put our trust in the legal profession. If we're disappointed with the results, confidence in the whole justice system suffers.

That's why with the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act (2007), The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) has been established. The Commission will replace all functions of the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman as well as some complaints areas of the Law Society of Scotland. The Commission has been created to receive, investigate and resolve complaints made against legal practitioners and brings together the powerful combination of Commissioners from both the legal profession and the general public. The Commission will deliver an independent resolution of complaints without delay and effectively.

The Commission will be based in Edinburgh, will commence in October 2008 and will employ around 45 staff. Before we start work we need to build our management team. We need people with the vision, determination and drive to lead our people, achieve objectives and play a central role in making a real impact for the people of Scotland.

Head of Investigations (HoI)
Salary Band £58,599 to £72,717 pa

This is a crucial role in the Commission and requires to be filled by a candiate of the highest calibre to work within the Senior Management Team.

The principal function of the HoI will be the efficient management of the Investigations Operations Team numbering around 30 employees and ensuring that policy and processes are delivered in line with stated objectives and that caseload key performance indicators are met and exceeded. The HoI will be come involved in specific cases that are atypical because they are unususal or precedential. As HoI you will line manage the team of Investigation Team Managers who in turn manage Complaints Investigators and Support Officers. The role requires that you ensure that systems are robust and respond to process change requirements where necessary and to advise the Chief Executive Officer accordingly. The HoI will also manage our Mediation and Gateway Teams.

You will have experience in complaints handling and be professional qualified. The role demands an individual with excellent organisational skills, a skilful communicator at Board and team level and a sharp analytical mind to exercise sound judgement. The ability to handle complex and sensitive issues and to produce reports and the interpretation of data is essential. You will have a track record of significant achievement.

You will be highly motivated and enjoy the challenge of working in an environment that requires adherence to process, the speedy yet consistent turnaround of legal complaints whilst continuing to develop systems to suit the ongoing needs of the Commission.

The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission is an Equal Opportunities Employer and welcome applications from all sectors of the community.

To download an application form and job description and find out more about the SLCC visit our website at : http://www.scottishlegalcomplaints.com/

Application forms can also be obtained by telephoning Julie Muir on 0131 224 8242.

To apply for this role please send your CV, application form and covering letter to: julie.muir@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or apply in writing to: Julie Muir, SLCC Project Team, 2nd Floor West, St Andrews House, Regent Road, Edinburgh, EH1 3DG.

Closing date for applications: Friday 6 June 2008

Legal firms 'vote' for opening legal services market but obstacles & lengthy delays remain

Despite the seething tempers of the Law Society of Scotland's leadership who favour continuation of the closed market of legal services in Scotland, some 850 solicitors voted to open up the market at Thursday's Law Society of Scotland Annual General Meeting.

While there remain many obstacles to overcome before legislation which would allow such a move is put forward, and no doubt much more interference, perhaps the odd bout of prevarication, delay and a few spanners thrown in the works from the 'old guard' of the Law Society, Scots will one day enjoy more of a choice in their selection of legal representatives than what is currently on offer.

The closed shop gang, which may include Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, still have some powerful friends in Parliament though, so don't expect things to run too smoothly or quickly on this one ... delay and filibuster will be the order of the day, perhaps taking a leaf out of the seventeen year wait to implement Sections 25-29 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1990, which sought to do much the same ... only being brought into law in March 2007 !

The Herald reports :

Legal firms vote to back historic ‘Tesco law’ partnership

LUCY ADAMS, Chief Reporter

Supermarkets and banks could run or work in partnership with Scottish legal firms in future, following a "historic" vote taken by more than 1000 lawyers last night.

Some 853 solicitors voted in favour of opening up the legal services market yesterday following consultation on what has been dubbed "Tesco Law".

Most of the votes were cast by proxy, but only 152 voted against the move at the Law Society of Scotland's annual meeting.

The decision, which could lead to external ownership of law firms, partnerships between solicitors and non-solicitors, and organisations such as banks and supermarkets providing legal services including conveyancing and will-writing, will require further consultation before being put forward for legislation.

The move follows the lodging of a "super complaint" with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) 12 months ago by Which?, the consumer watchdog, which said the current regulation of Scottish legal firms was hindering competition in the market, restricting choice and pushing up prices.

Kenny MacAskill was obliged to act after the OFT upheld the calls for a reform of Scotland's legal services market.

Following the Clementi Review in England and Wales, legislation was introduced to open up legal services there. This will be enacted in 2010 and both the AA and the Co-op have already moved to establish legal services companies.

Richard Henderson, president of the Law Society of Scotland, said: "This is a historic decision. The profession has been asked by the Scottish Government to decide on its future direction and I think that we have risen to that challenge today by voting in favour of change.

"There has been a great deal of thought and discussion surrounding alternative business structures. The society's council consulted the profession and it was apparent from the responses that there was an appetite for change within the legal profession."

He added: "This is only the first step in what will be a lengthy journey. The society will continue to work closely with its members from across all sectors of the profession, the government and other stakeholders to ensure that any future reforms will benefit those who require legal services and that access to justice remains central. A crucial part of developing successful and workable new policies will be to ensure that those providing legal services are properly regulated and work to the professional standards expected of them."

The debate around so-called "alternative business structures" has proven deeply divisive among lawyers. There are fears that many small Scots firms could be wiped out by a competitive free-for-all and that permitting external ownership could compromise professional integrity.

The OFT believes a "fit-to-own" test would safeguard the integrity of legal services delivery and claims many small firms and sole practitioners will actually benefit from outside investment.

Mr MacAskill said: "I am pleased that Law Society members have accepted the proposals presented to the AGM and I look forward to working with the profession in the coming months to implement these proposals.

"This is an exciting time and there will be great benefits for those who take advantage of the opportunities these proposals provide."

Crown Office justifies 'lawyer switch' hearing in Lockerbie appeal

It seems the Crown Office are a wee bit desperate to justify their stance, or maybe 'distance themselves' from the forthcoming Appeal Court hearing this week where the Advocate General, will seek to have the court spectacularly switch the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for one of their own.

A letter appearing in Friday's Herald newspaper from the Deputy Crown Agent John A Dunn seeks to 'allay' the concerns of readers & the public in Scotland ...

"It wisnae me" comes to mind ? .... and perish the thought the Lord Advocate or Crown Office would ever consider using such a power if granted later on ... !

The Herald reports :

Lockerbie appeal

YOUR LETTERS

I am concerned your readers may have been misled as to the position of the Crown in a matter of considerable public importance (Bid to ban lawyers in secret hearings, and accompanying editorial, May 22).

The Appeal Court has set three days aside next week to hear proposals from the Advocate General, representing the United Kingdom Government, the Crown and the representatives of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, on the procedure the court should follow when hearing arguments on the issue of Public Interest Immunity (PII) which has arisen in the appeal.

The claim of PII in the Lockerbie appeal has been taken by the UK Government, not by the Lord Advocate. The UK Government is represented by the Advocate General.

The court hearings next week will take place in public and it will be entirely a matter for the court to determine whether any future hearings in private are required.

The Lord Advocate, as public prosecutor, has a responsibility to ensure that all criminal proceedings in Scotland, including appeals, are conducted fairly.

It is the UK Government, and not the Crown, that has raised the issue of PII. Next week's hearing will enable the court to decide what further procedure is necessary, but there is no question of the Crown seeking to have next week's hearing in private, far less excluding the appellant's legal team from participating, as suggested in your editorial.

The purpose and nature of next week's court hearing had already been discussed in open court, with journalists present, in February 2008.

John A Dunn, Deputy Crown Agent, Crown Office, 25 Chambers Street, Edinburgh.

Crown Office seeking ruling to change Lockerbie defence team lawyers in secret hearing

Its hardly safe to go outside these days, and the Crown Office is intent on making sure you wont even be safe in court with a legal team with their forthcoming attempt to change the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi for "special security vetted advocates" they will vet themselves ...

After gaining this 'dream power' to use, no doubt the Lord Advocate will seek to apply it to any case which might just bring the Government or simply the Crown Office into disrepute .... tough times ahead for us all.

The Herald reports :

Bid to ban Lockerbie lawyers in secrets hearing

LUCY ADAMS, Chief Reporter

Prosecutors will next week attempt to throw an unprecedented veil of secrecy over the appeal of the Lockerbie bomber.

The Crown Office will ask judges to bypass the defence team of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi and appoint special security-vetted advocates to represent him in a court hearing to decide whether a previously confidential document should be made public.

If the bid for a closed-door session is successful, it would be the first time in Scotland that such a step has been taken in a criminal case.

However, the tactic will fuel suspicions that the Crown is going to unusual lengths to preserve the UK's current diplomatic relations with other nations.

The paperwork, which originated in an unknown foreign country, is thought to contain vital information about the electronic timer which detonated the bomb that killed 270 people in the skies over Lockerbie.

It is not known if political pressure has been exercised directly on the Crown, but there have been previous instances in the Megrahi case where Britain's changed attitudes to foreign states since 1988 have played a key role in the legal process.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband has already said the document should remain confidential.

It was uncovered during the three-year investigation of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which resulted in the case being referred back to the courts for a new appeal last summer. The commission concluded the failure during the original trial to disclose the document could constitute a miscarriage of justice. Although the Crown allowed the commission to see the material, it has refused to disclose it to Megrahi's defence team.

The Crown's latest move is expected to anger further his lawyers, who believe the failure to disclose the document calls into question the ultimate right to a fair appeal.

The request will be made on Tuesday at the Court of Criminal Appeal when the decision on whether to grant the defence access to the document is to be debated.

The Crown is expected to ask for the hearing to be held behind closed doors in the absence of the defence, who would be represented by special advocates. Public Interest Immunity hearings of this kind in criminal cases have previously been held only south of the border, where there is a statutory system in place, and a list of special advocates.

Megrahi's defence team has made it clear that it needs to see the document in order to proceed with the appeal, and has accused the UK Government of "interference" in the appeal.

If the prosecution denies access to the paper, Megrahi's lawyers are expected to argue that the conviction should be quashed because, without it, their client's right to a fair trial would be breached.

One legal expert said: "This is entirely unprecedented in Scotland."

A spokesman for the Crown Office said the court hearing is to be from from May 27 to 29 in Edinburgh. "It is not possible to provide further comment," he said.

Absence of lawyers made courts 'run faster' as work to rule strikes back

As popular as it is to knock lawyers at every turn, the fact is that a person's rights might not be fully addressed if they do not have adequate & competent legal representation.

However, the recent 'work to rule' by solicitors over the legal aid issue saw some courts run faster with their absence ...

The Sunday Mail reports :

Lawyers' protest backfires as court runs quicker without them

May 18 2008 Exclusive by Campbell Thomas

A WORK-TO-RULE protest by lawyers flopped when their court ran quicker without them.

Briefs refused to take custody cases at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court in a bid to cause chaos on one of the busiest days of the year.

They are fighting to keep their £60-an-hour fees paid by the public in Legal Aid cases.

But two solicitors obliged to work whisked through more than 40 cases in two hours less than normal.

One lawyer who defied the protest during the local bank holiday weekend accused his colleagues of greed.

Neil McPherson said: "When I look at my colleagues and their top-of-the-range cars, the houses they live in, the holidays and meals they talk about and all the rest of it, then they refuse to do their professional duty, the only common denominator is greed.

"We have been given a position in society and I feel very privileged to be a lawyer. It's an appointment that is well reimbursed financially. But I also have a duty to my clients to do my best for them.

"When workers go on strike they give up their pay on a point of principle but all these lawyers did was disrupt the court system and make sure they didn't lose a penny. It's abominable.

"The biggest irony is that the court ran quicker and more smoothly without them. The 40 plus custodies were processed by 4.15pm with only two duty solicitors.

"With that number of custodies the court would normally still be running after 6pm."

Christine Cockburn, sheriff clerk at Kilmarnock, added: "There was no disruption and we were able to process the cases very quickly."

The Law Society of Scotland had advised its members not to take action.

But its spokesman Oliver Adair admitted they were not employed by the Crown and therefore free to do whatever they saw fit.

He said: "We appreciate there are legitimate concerns about the package.

"However the progress we have made is quite extensive and we think there is more prospect of resolution by remaining inclusive rather than seeking confrontation.

"There have been a number of concessions and we are encouraging non-confrontation because the Scottish Government is still listening.

"We are pleased that one of our members has followed Law Society of Scotland advice in this regard."

Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to hear appeal over Jodi Jones murder conviction

Weekend newspapers report plans for an appeal to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission by Luke Mitchell over his conviction for the killing of his 14 year old girlfriend Jodi Jones in 2003 is being taken up by Mitchell's legal team after last week's appearance before Appeal judges who upheld Mitchell's conviction.

This was the second appeal in Scotland in recent weeks to be televised, and some are wondering if the effect of having cameras in the court has benefited the situation or detracted from it, particularly since both cases which have been recently filmed suffer from lack of disclosure and allegations of concealed evidence ...

Scotland on Sunday reports :

Jodi killer plans fresh appeal

By Marcello Mega

THE family of murdered Jodi Jones face new heartache this weekend as lawyers for teenage killer Luke Mitchell plan to seek a fresh appeal against his conviction.

Appeal judges last week upheld 19-year-old Mitchell's conviction for the killing of his 14-year-old girlfriend in Midlothian in 2003.

But his lawyers revealed yesterday that they will take his case to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to seek a fresh appeal hearing.

They are determined that the appeal court should examine fresh evidence that it has so far refused to consider relating to a potential alternative suspect for the brutal murder.

Mitchell's legal team expected that the appeal judges, led last week by the Lord President, Lord Hamilton, would uphold the conviction.

One of the team, Nigel Beaumont, said: "He's 19 years old with 16 years of a life sentence still to serve.

"No-one would expect him to give up now when there is still credible evidence that could help his case that has not been fully examined."

The new moves will come as a blow to Jodi's family, who expected last week's appeal hearing would end their post-trial ordeal. They were unavailable for comment yesterday but Jodi's mother, Judith, left court saying the rejection of the appeal was "brilliant" and she was "relieved it was all over".

Mitchell was convicted in January 2005 of a murder that shocked the world. The killer and his victim, both from Dalkeith, were just 14 at the time of June 30, 2003, when Jodi was killed in a ferocious knife attack. Her virtually naked body was found in a wooded area alongside a path that ran between their homes.

Police suspicions against Mitchell were first aroused by the fact that he discovered her body during a search conducted by her friends and relatives. Others who were present later told detectives that the body was not visible from the path, yet Mitchell appeared to have led them straight to it.

But Mitchell's legal team believe this is in part why the fresh evidence is crucial.

A source close to the team said: "The police said publicly that from the very start they kept an open mind, that they spent months examining every witness statement, every piece of information, and did not make their move until they had eliminated every other possibility.

"Yet many months after the trial and conviction, they receive a witness statement from someone who had told the police at the time of a potential suspect.

"Not only did the Crown not pass that information to the defence, as they should have done under disclosure rules, they did not consider the alternative suspect seriously because their mind was made up."

The alternative suspect was named in appeal papers submitted by Mitchell's legal team as Mark Kane. At the time of the murder, he was on a residential course at Newbattle Abbey College for people recovering from addiction problems.

But the appeal court was told that Kane had been cleared by DNA tests.

Advocate depute John Beckett QC, for the Crown, also told the judges that Kane had been questioned by police and had told them: "I know nothing else about the murder of Jodi Jones."

It was alleged by a friend of Kane's that he often took alcohol and cannabis into the woods, close to where Jodi was murdered, to avoid detection by course supervisors.

Like Mitchell, he was a devotee of the rock band Nirvana and the singer Marilyn Manson, whose pictures of the infamous Black Dahlia murder victim Elizabeth Short were believed to have influenced the killer when mutilating Jodi's body.

Kane also had a fascination with websites that displayed graphic images of violence and would show his favourite scenes, such as people being impaled on spikes, to his fellow-students.

He was suspected by college authorities of being responsible for defacing doors and walls with a heavy knife or chisel with the words 'kill' and 'die' and the Nazi swastika. Three weeks before Jodi's murder, he penned an essay entitled 'Killing a female in the woods'.

On the day after the murder, he had scratches to his face and arms, particularly under the eye, and claimed he could not remember how he got them, but when pressed later gave at least three different accounts.

The source said: "Here was someone who had an interest in graphic violence against women. He wasn't in Inverness or Aberdeen. He was right on the doorstep at the time of the murder.

"The standard for admitting fresh evidence at the appeal stage is that it could not have been made available at the time and is significant enough that it could have had a material impact on the jury's verdict.

"The defence could not make available what it had not been told. As for the second part, I think the jury would have been interested to know there was an alternative suspect to a 14-year-old boy."