Yesterday, we acted for the appellant in the
first ever virtual court hearing to take place in Scotland, in response to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The hearing was an appeal to the Inner House of the
Court of Session, from a decision of the Sheriff Court in the case of Stuart
Campbell v Kezia Dugdale. The appeal was heard by The Lord President,
Lord Carloway, sitting with Lord Menzies and Lord Brodie. Craig Sandison
QC appeared for the appellant and Roddy Dunlop QC for the respondent.
The hearing had originally been scheduled to take place last
month, the day after the nationwide lock-down was announced. The new
virtual hearing date was arranged in consultation with the clerk of court and Senior
Counsels’ diaries on three week’s notice and it was agreed that parties would
submit full written submissions in advance of the hearing, to assist with the
smooth running of proceedings and to ensure that the court stipulated duration
of three hours could be adhered to.
Following a brief training session on the video conferencing
software by a member of the IT team at Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service a
week beforehand, there was then a “dress rehearsal” with judges and counsel, to
make sure everything was in place for the hearing proper, and issues, from
echoey microphones to who to contact if there should be technological glitch
during the hearing, were discussed.
The video conferencing software used by the courts worked
extremely smoothly. “Panellists” – the judges, counsel and the clerk of
court - were provided with log-in details that allowed them to be viewed on
screen and to be heard. “Attendees” - such as agents, clients and members
of the press - were provided with a different link that allowed only viewing of
the proceedings, with device cameras and microphones automatically muted.
Viewing proceedings in “gridview” allowed all panellists to be seen at once, much
like a more cerebral version of the “House Parties” those of us with a wide enough social circle are becoming accustomed to during this period of social distancing.
The hearing itself, once started, very quickly became
indistinguishable from one proceeding in a physical courtroom. We had
arranged with Senior Counsel beforehand to contact each other by text message,
should any issues arise where that would be required. Judges appeared to
have both hard copy and electronic papers to refer to, and were easily able to
interrupt counsel where necessary to pose any questions they had. There
was only one brief moment of panic, when Senior Counsel for the Respondent failed
to appear back on screen after a brief mid-morning break, but that was
quickly remedied. The court made avizandum (that is, will consider matters and announce its decision at a later date) but then, rather than “court
rise”, the video feed of each participant eventually unceremoniously flickered
off screen, as each “left meeting”.
In all then, a quietly historic moment in the provision of justice in Scotland. Our thanks go to everyone who worked so incredibly hard to make this happen and to make it ultimately seem so effortless.
[For some of the press and official comment on the hearing see:
Virtual court hears Kezia Dugdale defamation appeal and The virtual world is new normal in Scottish courts (BBC)
Court reports successful first virtual hearing (Law Society of Scotland)
Legal history as 'virtual court' hears Kezia Dugdale appeal case (Scotsman)
A small piece of Scottish legal history (Scottish Review)]
[For some of the press and official comment on the hearing see:
Virtual court hears Kezia Dugdale defamation appeal and The virtual world is new normal in Scottish courts (BBC)
Court reports successful first virtual hearing (Law Society of Scotland)
Legal history as 'virtual court' hears Kezia Dugdale appeal case (Scotsman)
A small piece of Scottish legal history (Scottish Review)]