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.
Respondents: McBride, F.M. Davies; McAfee, Airdrie: Murray, Q.C., Gilbride; Bell Russell
The relevant chronology must be set out in more detail. The charge which the respondents presently face is in essence similar to the charge of which they were originally convicted. It arises out of alleged events on Saturday 15 June 1996. The respondents were detained on 17 June and appeared on petition on about 20 June 1996. Along with a number of co-accused they went to trial in the High Court at Glasgow. The trial began on 10 October and ended in their conviction on 22 October 1996.
Agents for Renicks indicated an intention to appeal on 28 October and the agents for McGlinchey on the following day, 29 October 1996. In each case the agents took this step well within the period of two weeks allowed under Section 109(1) of the 1995 Act. The agents then had a further six weeks within which to lodge a note of appeal. The agents for Renicks lodged the note of appeal on 9 December and the agents for McGlinchey on 10 December 1996, again within the statutory time-limit.
The right with which we are concerned derives from the first sentence of Article 6(1):
"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law."
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.