Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
[1] The appellant is charged upon indictment with having embezzled a sum of over �54,000 from her employers during 1991. On 5 April 2000, the Sheriff at Stirling heard parties in respect of a minute which had been lodged by the appellant, raising a devolution issue. The court refused the minute, and the appellant appeals against that refusal.
[2] The appellant alleges a breach of the provision contained in Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing "within a reasonable time" by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
"'Charge', for the purposes of Article 6(1), may be defined as 'the official notification given to an individual by the competent authority of an allegation that he has committed a criminal offence', a definition that also corresponds to the test whether 'the situation of the [suspect] has been substantially affected'."
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.