Sent:
01 June 2015 12:08
To:
Forbes, Isla
Subject:
The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
I understand that a petition was lodged on Friday - The People vs Carmichael. Can you tell me the case number please?
I also understand that Lord Eassie and Lady Paton will hear the case. Can you confirm that please?
Regards,
Stuart Hill.
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: The People vs Carmichael
Mr Hill
The petition number in the case you have stated is P558/15.
I am however unable to confirm whether or not the Judges you mentioned will be hearing the case as this is not information I am privy to.
Regards Isla Forbes
Sent:
01 June 2015 14:57
To:
Forbes, Isla
Subject:
Re: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
It is possible that I may wish to become an interested party in this case. Can you please let me know the procedure?
Regards,
Stuart Hill.
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: The People vs Carmichael
Mr Hill
Staff within the Court of Session are not legally qualified. I strongly suggest that you seek legal advice on how best to proceed in regards to this matter.
Regards Isla
Sent:
01 June 2015 16:18
To:
Forbes, Isla
Subject:
Re: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
I am not asking for any legal advice. I simply want to know the procedure. If there is none, please let me know accordingly.
Please also supply contact details for the parties or their representatives.
Please also advise the date of the hearing.
Regards,
Stuart Hill.
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 4:26 PM
Subject: RE: The People vs Carmichael
Mr Hill,
The agents representing the petitioners are Balfour & Manson LLP in Edinburgh.
If you wish to become party to the action , as previously stated I strongly recommend you seek legal advice.
As it stands, there is no hearing assigned in this case.
Unfortunately I cannot comment further in regards to this matter.
Regards Isla
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 2:32 PM Attached is the Notice.
Subject: Re: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
I have been trying to send some documents, but it seems the email is too big for you to accept. I will try breaking down the attachments and hope this is able to reach you.
Please find attached documents for filing in this case. Please confirm they have been placed in the case file and that the judges will see them before the hearing.
Hard copies follow by post.
The judges will find the electronic copy of the main document easier to use since it contains hyperlinks to the authorities.
The documents are prefixed with the number by which they are referred to in the main document, which has the prefix 1.
Copies have been sent to the parties.
Regards,
Stuart: Hill.
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 3:01 PM
Subject: RE: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Mr Hill
As previously stated within my emails yesterday if you wish to become party to the action it is strongly recommended that you seek legal advice. Any Answers lodged within the case must be in the correct form as per the Rules of Court of Session and a lodging fee of £202.00 must be paid. Any other documentation cannot be accepted into process and will be returned to you.
Regards Isla Forbes
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
What I have sent you cannot be described as Answers. It is a Notice. When the Supreme Court received such a Notice in a case in which I was not a party, it was quite properly put before the judges (at my insistence). I cannot therefore accept that what I have done is incompetent.
With all due respect, it is not up to you to decide whether or not the court has jurisdiction. Neither is it a matter for the parties, since they can neither confer jurisdiction if it does not already exist, nor deny it if it does. It is a matter for the judges and the judges alone.
I cannot imagine that you would take the action of ignoring and rejecting my Notice on your own initiative, so it must be my reasonable presumption that the court is aware of it. The court cannot ignore such a notice and it cannot un-know its knowledge of it. It is incumbent upon the court to hear proof of its jurisdiction if such jurisdiction is challenged. In the knowledge that such a Notice of Lack of Jurisdiction exists, it would be reckless and negligent for any judge to proceed to a hearing without first hearing evidence of the court's jurisdiction from the party bringing the case.
If jurisdiction exists, it will be a simple matter to prove it. If not, any judge will be acting ultra vires in hearing the case. This is a serious matter if done with the slightest knowledge of a lack of jurisdiction. I draw your attention to paragraph 14 of the Notice.
To simply ignore and return competent documentation would be tantamount to admitting the court has no jurisdiction and I would be entitled to make that presumption if such action were to be taken.
Please be aware that it is my intention to make this Notice public, together with the court's actions in dealing with it.
Regards,
Stuart: Hill.
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: The People vs Carmichael
Dear Ms. Forbes,
My package was accepted at the Court of Session this morning at 10am. You now have the Notice with all supporting documents. The court cannot deny being notified that it has no jurisdiction in Shetland and that Notice will stand until it hears proof to the contrary.
May I please ask you to inform me when a hearing is arranged?
Regards,
Stuart: Hill.
No further reply.