TAM v. MJS

[1] This is a petition to the nobile officium of the court. The petitioner seeks suspension of a sentence of three months civil imprisonment imposed on her by Sheriff Richard Davidson at Dundee Sheriff Court on 16 December 2008 for contempt of court. The finding of contempt related to the petitioner's conduct in an action raised against her in that court by her former cohabitant, the respondent. By interlocutor dated 19 December 2008 we granted warrant for the interim liberation of the petitioner from HM Prison, Corntonvale.

[2] The exercise of the nobile officium is the only competent procedure by which a sentence imposed for contempt of court in civil proceedings in the sheriff court can be reviewed (Macphail , Sheriff Court Practice , 3rd ed, para 2.25; Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia , Reissue: Civil Procedure, para 290 ).

[4] The procedural history of the action, so far as relevant to this petition, is as follows. On 15 September 2005 , at the first child welfare hearing, Sheriff McCulloch granted the respondent interim contact and continued the case for a further hearing on 27 October 2005 . On 27 October 2005 the petitioner failed to appear. The hearing was adjourned to 10 November 2005 . On 10 November 2005 Sheriff Munro granted the respondent increased contact. On 12 January 2006 Sheriff Davidson made further minor variations to the contact order.

[5] At the end of January 2006, the petitioner's solicitors, Messrs W G Boyle & Co, Dundee , withdrew from acting. A peremptory diet was fixed for 28 February 2006 . At that diet a further hearing was fixed for 9 March 2006 . On 9 March 2006 a further contact order was made in favour of the respondent. The case was continued to a further hearing on 20 April 2006 . On 20 April 2006 the petitioner again failed to appear. The hearing was continued to 27 April for her appearance. On 27 April 2006 Sheriff Hughes continued the existing contact order.

[6] On 15 August 2006 a joint minute was lodged in which the parties agreed that the case should proceed as undefended on the question of paternity and that an order should be made in favour of the respondent for contact with the child for four hours on alternate Sundays and for two hours every Wednesday. The sheriff pronounced an interlocutor in terms of the joint minute and allowed the case to proceed to proof by evidence on affidavit. The petitioner was then represented by Messrs Finlay MacRae, Dundee .