JUDICIAL RECUSALS
The role of a judge is to interpret and apply the law without bias or prejudice. Judges have a duty to sit on the cases allocated to them based primarily on their availability, and must deal with them efficiently avoiding unnecessary delay.
Declinature of jurisdiction, or recusal, refers to the act of a judicial office holder abstaining from taking part in legal proceedings due to a conflict of interest; or in cases where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Judges can decline to sit; or parties to a case can object to the judge’s involvement by making a motion for declinature. This might involve financial interest or a close family relationship.
More minor conflicts may be declared before the court. The parties to the case can then either object to the judge’s involvement or proceed based on agreement that the interest is suitably insignificant.
Cases where senators, temporary judges, sheriffs principal, sheriffs, summary sheriffs, justices of the peace, or a member of a Scottish tribunal, grant or refuse a formal motion for recusal, or recuse themselves of their own accord, in open court, are recorded for the current year in the table below.
Previous years have been archived.
2025
| Date | JOH & Court/Chamber | Case Name/Reference | Motion By | Refused /Granted | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/08/2026 | Sheriff N Wilson - Wick Sheriff Court | WCK-A33-22 | Ex-proprio motu | Granted | The Pursuer was the subject of earlier contested civil proceedings in which a public authority successfully sought a protective order. Those proceedings were determined by the sheriff, who issued a detailed written judgment containing findings of fact concerning the Pursuer’s conduct. The Minute to Vary avers, inter alia, that the Defenders have acted in a defamatory manner by repeating matters found established in those earlier proceedings to the applicable civil standard of proof. If the Pursuer maintains that the repetition of findings contained within the sheriff’s earlier judgment constitutes defamatory conduct, the court would be required to determine issues directly connected to findings previously made by the presiding sheriff. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the interests of justice and the appearance of impartiality favour the sheriff’s recusal from further involvement in the present proceedings |
| 23/07/2026 | Lady Carmichael and Lord Mulholland - Court of Session, Parliament House, Edinburgh | COS-XA27-26 | Applicant (party litigant) | Refused | The fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would not conclude that there is a real possibility that either Lady Carmichael or Lord Mulholland is biased in relation to this application for permission to appeal. |
| 20/07/2026 | Suzanne Sinclair - MHTS | MHTS/2/26/05/02321/S1012b | Suzanne Sinclair | Granted | The member has a connection to one of the doctors providing evidence to the Tribunal |
| 17/05/2026 | Sandra Duke - MHTS | MHTS/2/26/05/01483/S063 | Sandra Duke | Granted | Member has had significant clinical contact with a patient with the same name and age as the patient's daughter as an inpatient RMO. The patient was from this health board area. |
| 14/04/2026 | Eric Baijal - MHTS | 00204/s1001 | Recusal by Tribunal Member independent of motion | Granted | Adult known to close relation of Tribunal Member |
| 05/03/2026 | Sheriff I Wallace - Aberdeen Sheriff Court | ABE-A224-25 | Sheriff | Granted | Defender is known to the Sheriff |
| 04/03/2026 | Thomas E Shaw - MHTS | MHTS/2/26/02/11844/SO63 | Convenor | Granted | Convenor established before the hearing commenced that he had apparently either acted for the Named Person or the Patient in 2014. |
| 02/03/2026 | Sheriff McElroy - Dumbarton Sheriff Court | Beltrami & Company Limited v Dr Karen Wilson | ex proprio motu | Granted | Sheriff previously been instructed by the pursuer as counsel. |
| 26/02/2026 | Sheriff Findlater - Aberdeen Sheriff Court | ABE-SQ45-25 | EPM | Granted | Defender is known to the Sheriff, as he was a practicing solicitor |
| 26/02/2026 | Sheriff C Findlater - Aberdeen Sheriff Court | ABE-SQ44-25 | EPM | Granted | Defender is known to the Sheriff, as he was a practicing solicitor |
| 19/02/2026 | Sheriff Alison McKay - Perth Sheriff Court | Kieran Phillips | Sheriff | Granted | Following the calling of the case the agent for Mr Phillips noted that the accused was previously a direct client of Sheriff McKay's. Sheriff McKay confirmed this was the case and that she would be unable to conduct the trial. |
| 18/02/2026 | Sheriff William Wood - Perth Sheriff Court | PER-A101-24 | EPM | Granted | The Sheriff previously presided over a civil case with the defender which they feel precludes them from sitting on further cases involving the defender |
| 18/02/2026 | Sheriff Alison McKay - Perth Sheriff Court | PER-F161-24 | EPM | Granted | Sheriff advised Clerk prior to calling of the case that she could not deal with the case, as she represented the defender over a number of years when in private practice in Perth. |
| 18/02/2026 | Sheriff Alison McKay - Perth Sheriff Court | PER-F179-24 | EPM | Granted | Sheriff advised Clerk prior to calling of the case that she could not deal with the case, as she represented the defender over a number of years when in private practice in Perth. |
| 18/02/2026 | Sheriff Alison McKay - Perth Sheriff Court | SCS/2024-096603 | EPM | Granted | <p>The accused has been previously represented by the Sheriff’s former firm prior to judicial appointment.</p> |
| 17/02/2026 | Sheriff McCartney - Dumbarton Sheriff Court | F226/22 | Sheriff & Parties | Granted | Two minutes arise after Sheriff made final order after proof; the credibility and reliability of the parties commented upon in proof; similar allegations arise in each minute |
| 16/02/2026 | Dr Ross Hamilton - MHTS | MHTS/2/26/02/11312/S063 | Self Recusal by Tribunal Member | Granted | Patient very well known to Tribunal Member from clinical work pre-retirement |
| 09/02/2026 | Sheriff G K Murray - Dundee Sheriff Court | Carolann Curran v Lynsey Thompson | Pursuer | Refused | No basis for recusal at this stage in proceedings |
| 20/01/2026 | Sheriff Elizabeth McFarlane - Perth Sheriff Court | Chas Stewart Plumbing & Heating Engineers Ltd v David Keen | Sheriff | Granted | Recusal was granted because the respondent’s representative raised a concern about potential bias, and to avoid delays in the progress of the case, the sheriff recused herself. |
| 06/01/2026 | Summary Sheriff Wark - Aberdeen Sheriff Court | ABE-B162-25 | Party | Refused | <div>Recusal refused as the sheriff, nor any other party, did not believe there were any valid reason for recusal.</div> |
