PART XIII Miscellaneous

F1Excusal of irregularities

Annotations:
Amendments (Textual)
F1

S. 300A and cross-heading inserted (10.12.2007) by Criminal Proceedings etc. (Reform) (Scotland) Act 2007 (asp 6), ss. 40, 84; S.S.I. 2007/479, art. 3(1), Sch. (subject to art. 11) (as amended by S.S.I. 2007/527)

300APower of court to excuse procedural irregularities

1

Any court may excuse a procedural irregularity—

a

of a kind described in subsection (5) below; and

b

which has occurred in relation to proceedings before that court,

if the conditions mentioned in subsection (4) below are met.

2

In appeal proceedings, the F2court hearing the appeal may excuse a procedural irregularity—

a

of that kind; and

b

which has occurred in relation to earlier proceedings in the case that is the subject of the appeal,

if those conditions are met.

3

A court may proceed under subsection (1) or (2) above on the application of the prosecutor or an accused person (having given the other an opportunity to be heard).

4

The conditions are that—

a

it appears to the court that the irregularity arose because of—

i

mistake or oversight; or

ii

other excusable reason; and

b

the court is satisfied in the circumstances of the case that it would be in the interests of justice to excuse the irregularity.

5

A procedural irregularity is an irregularity arising at any stage of proceedings—

a

from—

i

failure to call or discharge a diet properly;

ii

improper adjournment or continuation of a case;

iii

a diet being fixed for a non-sitting day;

b

from failure of—

i

the court; or

ii

the prosecutor or the accused,

to do something within a particular period or otherwise comply with a time limit;

c

from failure of the prosecutor to serve properly a notice or other thing;

d

from failure of the accused to—

i

intimate properly a preliminary objection;

ii

intimate properly a plea or defence;

iii

serve properly a notice or other thing;

e

from failure of—

i

the court; or

ii

the prosecutor or the accused,

to fulfil any other procedural requirement.

6

Subsection (1) above does not authorise a court to excuse an irregularity arising by reason of the detention in custody of an accused person for a period exceeding that fixed by this Act.

7

Subsection (1) above does not apply in relation to any requirement as to proof including, in particular, any matter relating to—

a

admissibility of evidence;

b

sufficiency of evidence; or

c

any other evidential factor.

F37A

Subsection (1) does not authorise a court to excuse a failure to do any of the following things timeously—

a

lodge written intimation of intention to appeal in accordance with section 109(1),

b

lodge a note of appeal in accordance with section 110(1)(a),

c

make an application for a stated case under section 176(1),

d

lodge a note of appeal in accordance with section 186(2)(a).

8

Where a court excuses an irregularity under subsection (1) above, it may make such order as is necessary or expedient for the purpose of—

a

restoring the proceedings as if the irregularity had never occurred;

b

facilitating the continuation of the proceedings as if it had never occurred, for example—

i

altering a diet;

ii

extending any time limit;

iii

appointing a diet for further procedure or granting an adjournment or continuation of a diet;

c

protecting the rights of the parties.

9

For the purposes of this section—

a

a reference to an accused person, except the reference in subsection (6) above, includes reference to a person who has been convicted of an offence;

b

something is done properly if it is done in accordance with a requirement of an enactment or any rule of law.

10

In subsection (5)(a)(iii) above, a “non-sitting day” is a day on which the court is under this Act not required to sit.

11

This section is without prejudice to any provision of this Act under which a court may—

a

alter a diet; or

b

extend—

i

a period within which something requires to be done; or

ii

any other time limit.

12

This section is without prejudice to any rule of law by virtue of which it may be determined by a court that breach, in relation to criminal proceedings—

a

of a requirement of an enactment; or

b

of a rule of law,

does not render the proceedings, or anything done (or purported to have been done) for the purposes of or in connection with proceedings, invalid.