Supreme Court yet to formulate contingency plan for “Yes” vote
The Supreme Court has not formed any contingency plans in the event of a “Yes” vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum on 18 September.
A Supreme Court spokesperson said that, should Scotland break away, it would “not happen overnight”, adding: “We have not been undertaking any detailed contingency planning in the event of a vote for Scottish independence.”
The Supreme Court and, before it, the House of Lords, has heard appeals from the Scottish civil, but not criminal, courts since 1708. Traditionally, the court always has at least one judge who is experienced in Scots law—currently Lord Reed, a former judge at the Court of Session in Scotland.
Consequently, if the Scots vote “Yes”, the court will have to consider whether, how, and at what point, it ceases to hear appeals from the Court of Session, and whether Lord Reed should remain in position.
In May, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution recommended that, if Scotland established its own Supreme Court, Justices with experience of Scots law would no longer be appointed but that serving Justices should continue to sit until their scheduled date of retirement.
The court’s spokesperson says: “That position of course remains purely hypothetical, and would presumably be one of the many matters discussed by politicians and others in the event of a vote for Scottish independence.”
LexisPSL has produced a booklet, "Future of the Union", on the impact of Scottish independence on a broad range of legal areas including arbitration, banking and finance, commercial law, immigration, pensions, Europe and employment.
