Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 12 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 914 contributions

|

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 April 2024

Bill Kidd

I will continue somewhat in that vein. In response to the committee’s call for views, the Faculty of Advocates said that it would be desirable to give judicial factors the additional power to seek directions from the appointing court. When the Scottish Law Commission gave evidence to the committee, it suggested that the possibility of seeking advice from the Accountant of Court, coupled with the opinion of requesting extra powers from the court under section 11, was all that would be required. Do you agree with the commission’s position, or do you see benefits to what the faculty is proposing? If you wish, you can explain your views with reference to practical examples of relevant situations.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Thank you.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Mr Pattullo, do you have anything to add?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Thank you very much, guests. My question might be on an issue of contention. Under section 4, the main qualification that is required for someone to be appointed as a judicial factor is that the court considers the person to be “suitable” for the role. It is the court’s decision. In response to the committee’s call for views, some respondents, such as Missing People, supported that approach. Others, however, wanted the bill to be more prescriptive. For example, Propertymark wanted professional qualifications to be specified in some circumstances. The committee heard that the Scottish Law Commission’s position is that the court is best placed to decide who is suitable for the role of judicial factor in a particular case. Does anyone on the panel disagree that that is the way forward? Should there be something different in the bill that limits the court’s discretion, rather than leaving it as it stands?

09:45  

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 23 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Based on what has been said, it would seem to be an unlikely scenario anyway, but should such a thing happen, is it not already covered?

Education, Children and Young People Committee

Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland (Strategic Plan 2024-28)

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Thank you for everything that you have outlined. You have pretty much covered this, but on promoting access to justice for breaches of children’s rights—that is a commitment in the plan—who will you approach so that those can be resolved? It is fine—I am not saying that this is what you are doing—to say, “This is wrong and we’re going to sort it out,” but how do you sort that out? Who do you approach to bring on board in legal terms, if it comes to that?

Education, Children and Young People Committee

Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland (Strategic Plan 2024-28)

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Thank you—that is really useful. I suppose that that fits in with the statement in the strategic plan that the commissioner’s office will work

“as an Independent Children’s Rights Institution”.

There needs to be a focal point and a place that people know that they can go to. They need to know what their rights are, and if people or organisations breach those rights, they need somebody with expertise to know what direction to head in to resolve that. Is that the approach that you will take in order to uphold children’s rights? Do you have an idea about timescales?

Education, Children and Young People Committee

Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland (Strategic Plan 2024-28)

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Bill Kidd

Thank you very much. That is helpful.

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 April 2024

Bill Kidd

That would be useful; we could perhaps delve a bit deeper into that.

Staying on caution, in response to the committee’s call for views, the University of Aberdeen and R3 said that they thought that the threshold for requiring caution in section 5 is now too high. Do you have any comments on that? For example, does the phrase “exceptional circumstances” fit with the general policy desire to make judicial factors a solution for the families with missing relatives? Do you see the link there?

Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 April 2024

Bill Kidd

My question is about the Accountant of Court, a role that you have talked about quite a wee bit this morning. There seems to be a differentiation between the SLC’s draft bill and the current draft bill that is not so much about the role but about who and how qualified that person is. In relation to sections 35 and 36 of the bill, the Law Society of Scotland commented on what it regards as a significant departure from the commission’s draft bill and a watering down of the level of legal and accountancy knowledge that is required for the accountant and the deputy accountant roles. The SLC’s draft bill said that they were to be

“knowledgeable in matters of law and accounting”.

However, in the current draft bill, they must be, in the opinion of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service,

“appropriately qualified or experienced in law and accounting”.

The policy memorandum to the bill also makes it clear that formal qualifications are not necessarily required.

What does the commission think about that approach to sections 35 and 36? Do you share the Law Society of Scotland’s concerns about that differentiation?