Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Legal news
  4. Barrister fined £5,000 for Supreme Court judgment leak

Barrister fined £5,000 for Supreme Court judgment leak

11th May 2021 | criminal law | Criminal legal aid

An environmental lawyer who broke an embargo by releasing details of a judgment of the UK Supreme Court before it was officially released, has been fined £5,000 for contempt of court.

A panel of three Supreme Court Justices, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Hamblen and Lord Stephens, found barrister Tim Crosland in criminal contempt of court, following proceedings brought by the Attorney General, for deliberately disclosing the result of the Supreme Court appeal concerning permission for the third runway at Heathrow Airport, prior to hand down of the judgment. 

Mr Crosland acted for Plan B, who opposed the runway and unsuccessfully resisted the appeal. He chose to leak the judgment, which had been made available to him under embargo, claiming his action to raise awareness of the case was a reasonable and proportionate measure to prevent climate change.

Giving the findings of the panel, Lord Lloyd-Jones said it was not necessary for Mr Crosland to disclose the result: once the judgment had been handed down, the parties, the public and the media were free to scrutinise the judgment and comment on it. He dismissed an argument that freedom of expression under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights provided a defence: the restriction on publication was temporary and a proportionate measure to achieve its ends, of circulating a draft judgment for corrections.

Mr Crosland's concerns and fears, and his disagreement with the decision, did not begin to justify his conduct. It was a "futile gesture", because the judgment would be available 22 hours later.

Dealing with penalty, Lord Lloyd-Jones noted that Mr Crosland (who had come to court expecting to be sent to prison) had not made any attempt to mitigate his conduct and had remained unrepentant save to apologise for the inconvenience to the staff of the Supreme Court. However the panel had decided that a fine of £5,000 was "necessary and proportionate to protect the integrity of the judiciary and its judgments".

 

 

 

Add To Favorites

Additional

  • News and events

In this section

  • Law Society news
  • CPD & Training
  • Blogs & opinions
  • Events
  • 75th Anniversary

Categories

  • civil litigation
  • criminal law
  • employment
  • obituary
  • careers
  • practice management
  • law society of scotland
  • government-administration
  • welfare/benefits
  • family-child law
  • reparation
  • professional regulation
  • property (non-commercial)
  • insolvency
  • consumer
  • human rights
  • mental health-adult incapacity
  • planning/environment
  • europe
  • information technology
  • immigration
  • education-training
  • executries
  • corporate
  • commercial property
  • agriculture-crofting
  • dispute resolution
  • risk management
  • intellectual property
  • client relations
  • tax
  • licensing
  • banking-financial services
  • trusts-asset management
  • reviews
  • opinion
  • For the public
  • Research and policy
  • Regulation
  • Journal online news
  • interview

News Archive

  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013

Related articles

  • Jury trials to return to the islands in spring
  • SCTS revises criminal case backlog predictions
  • Current justice funding model unsustainable: MSP report
  • Crime figures up 3% in first full post-Covid year
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited