There are 5,384 results relating to "table.i V"
Order by
|
Official Report
Meeting date:
15 February 2000
Public Petitions Committee, 15 Feb 2000
It wants the Parliament to conduct an inquiry into the condemnation by sheriffs or judges in Scottish courts of named persons who are not present as witnesses and are not represented in court, because such condemnation can result in injustice and possible public humiliation in the media.The issue arose in the aftermath of the 1996 sheriff court case, Crown v Donald Macleod, which resulted in the acquittal of the defendant, who had been charged with the sexual assault of five women.
Official Report
Meeting date:
6 December 2006
Justice 1 Committee, 06 Dec 2006
We did some research earlier this year, following Barker v Corus, into mesothelioma claims that come against our members.
Official Report
Meeting date:
29 January 2004
Plenary, 29 Jan 2004
Annabel Goldie referred to the famous case of Donoghue v Stevenson, which is a Scottish case that is applied more generally in the UK.
Official Report
Meeting date:
7 November 2005
Edinburgh Tram (Line One) Bill Committee, 07 Nov 2005
Mr Walker, we have heard quite a lot about the Hatton v United Kingdom case this afternoon.
Official Report
Meeting date:
22 November 2006
Education Committee, 22 Nov 2006
Our experience of dealing with part V of the Police Act 1997 and with the Protection of Children (Scotland) Act 2003 has been that organisations have considerable weaknesses at all levels in dealing appropriately with their requirements.We agree that organisations will benefit from a reduction in bureaucracy, which the bill will bring about.
Official Report
Meeting date:
30 May 2006
Justice 1 Committee, 30 May 2006
I remind members that the case of David Asbury v the Strathclyde joint police board and others is still active and as such is subject to the sub judice rule.
Official Report
Meeting date:
1 February 2006
Communities Committee, 01 Feb 2006
It was the same in the County Properties v the Scottish ministers case: the decision was reversed on appeal.
Official Report
Meeting date:
3 December 2003
Education Committee, 03 Dec 2003
Many local authorities spend a lot of time ensuring that the record of needs is a worthless document. They put information into part V, knowing full well that parents cannot appeal that part, but part IV is often vague nonsense that does nothing to develop the support for the child.
Official Report
Meeting date:
29 October 2002
Rural Development Committee, 29 Oct 2002
I will invite the minister to make some opening remarks about the instrument, after which I will open up the meeting for members to ask questions while we have the officials at the table.I point out that the Subordinate Legislation Committee has made no comment to us on the instrument.
Official Report
Meeting date:
7 October 2003
Procedures Committee, 07 Oct 2003
In that case, how can we get to stage (v), which deals with questions that have exactly the same random number?
