There are 5,384 results relating to "table.i V"
Order by
|
SPICe briefings
Date published:
10 January 2019
Informed Consent in Healthcare Settings - 2.3 Montgomery in the Supreme Court
2.3 Montgomery in the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court came to a different conclusion and found that the obstetrician was negligent in failing to disclose material risks to Nadine Montgomery.iMontgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11.
Questions and Answers
Date answered:
19 May 2025
S6W-37073
To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it had with women’s rights groups in relation to the For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers case. No meetings were held with organisations or stakeholders to discuss the case of For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers prior to the Supreme Court ju...
Last updated:
21 January 2025
Regulation of Legal Services Scotland Bill 20 January 2025
The distinction between the role of the Advocate and of the solicitor in a system such 14 as ours reflects, as a South African judge has observed , in terms which are equally applicable in Scotland, part of a liberal legal system”; Medcalf v. Mardell [2002] UKHL 27, para. 52 per Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough. 14 Rosemann v.
Official Report
Meeting date:
29 April 2025
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee 29 April 2025
Item 4 is consideration of evidence on the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and item 5 is consideration of the committee’s approach to scrutiny of the implications of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of For Women Scotland Ltd v the Scottish Ministers. Members indicated agreement.
Last updated:
17 October 2024
PE1876_GG
Our letter to the Chief Constable (which we are attaching) seeks clarity on those points. 1 Scottish Police Authority Board Meeting, 26 September 2024, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3gkQk90Re8 Our petition had one of the highest numbers of signatures of any petition considered by the Parliament.
Last updated:
23 September 2024
CabSecRALRI_SLCAppointments_19 September 2024
‘The factors taken into account by the Commissioner may include: (i) the seniority of the appointments (for example, the chairs of public bodies) (ii) the level of public expenditure for which the public body is responsible (iii) the nature of the public body and its role and responsibilities (iv) the level of public interest in the functions of the public body (v) recent performance of the relevant directorates relating to public appointments (vi) the nature of any assessment activity delegated by the panel, and to whom that activity is delegated (vii) the extent to which the current composition of the board is reflective of society and (viii) concerns reported to the Commissioner either prior to or during the course of an appointment round.”
Last updated:
30 March 2023
PE1941_I
T he Council’s Management Rules for all Cemetery and Burial Grounds also advises that: (Section 7 (v)): A Lair Holder shall be entitled to have a monument erected.
Last updated:
19 December 2022
PE1975_C
One of the first recorded cases of what we would now call SLAPPs was in the USA in 1802 in the case of Harris v Huntington. Harris was a powerful justice of the peace in Vermont, who sought to bring a case of libel against five ordinary citizens for petitioning the state against his reappointment.
Last updated:
17 September 2025
SPBill26BS062025
SCHEDULE 2 (introduced by section 22) A PPLICATION OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES LEGISLATION TO THE OFFICE OF V ICTIMS AND W ITNESSES 20 C OMMISSIONER FOR S COTLAND Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002 1 In Part 2 of schedule 2 of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Act 2002 (other Scottish public authorities liable to investigation), after paragraph 54 i...
Committee reports
Date published:
11 February 2026
Subordinate Legislation considered by the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee on 10 February 2026 - Proposed Draft Instrument
In relation to this proposed draft instrument, the Committee agreed to note that:
the proposed order appears capable of remedying the incompatibility with Convention rights identified in X v Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland;
the proposed order goes beyond addressing the specific incompatibility identified by the Court, which concerned recorded matters in...
