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. Sheriff rules on proof of course of behaviour for abuse

Sheriff rules on proof of course of behaviour for abuse

19th October 2021 | criminal law | Criminal legal aid

A course of alleged domestic abuse charged under s 1 of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 does not require corroboration for each separate act libelled, a sheriff has ruled.

Sheriff Douglas Kinloch at Livingston Sheriff Court gave the decision in repelling a submission of no case to answer on behalf of the accused, JH, at the conclusion of the Crown case. 

JH was charged with a course of behaviour between 1 October 2020 and 13 January 2021which was abusive of his partner or ex-partner X, by repeatedly striking her on the body, striking her on the head, persistently demanding intercourse and refusing to use contraception, demanding that she cease contact with male acquaintances, accusing her of infidelity, demanding that she meet him and uttering threats of violence when she refused.

In evidence X spoke to JH constantly pestering her for sex, punching her on the arm and slapping her on the leg on occasions, being questioned over her contact with an ex-partner, and phoning the police on one occasion when JH said her would be over and would "boot the door in" if she wasn't ready. Another witness spoke to JH's "flippant attitude" towards X, to telling them they should get advice about contraception, and to picking X up from her house one time when she was really upset. A police interview with JH was also agreed in which he admitted slapping X "maybe as a joke", and an occasion of threatening to kick her door in when he was "raging" and "trying to get her away from her house" because the person she stayed with didn't want him talking to her.

For the defence it was argued that X had only spoken to three parts of the libel, which were separate incidents that had to be corroborated separately, which they were not. JH had effectively denied assault, and the threat was not an admission of abusive behaviour.

Repelling the defence submissions, Sheriff Kinloch observed first that the offence under s 1 could not be committed by a single incident; and "acts which might otherwise not be connected, or even criminal, become connected and criminal by virtue of being part of a course of behaviour which is abusive of a partner or ex-partner".

After reviewing decisions on proving a course of criminal conduct, he stated: "The effectiveness of the Act depends to a very large extent on whether corroboration is needed for each separate act specified in the libel." The difficulty in applying the cases referred to was that the offence under s 1 required "a course of behaviour", and a charge under s 1 had to be seen as a single crime of engaging in a course of behaviour: "Without a course of behaviour there is no crime."

Just as importantly, much of the behaviour founded on "will not amount to criminal behaviour at all when looked at in isolation. It seems to me that it will not therefore be possible to try and determine whether there have in reality been a number of separate crimes... On this analysis there will never be a need for separate corroboration of separate incidents for a conviction under s 1".

In the present case, each of the three acts spoken to by X fell within the definition of abusive behaviour in the Act, and therefore there was evidence of a course of abusive behaviour. "What is required is corroboration of two or more instances of behaviour, whether or not the behaviour looked at in isolation would amount to a crime."

Taking the Crown evidence at its highest, JH's admissions corroborated X's evidence on the two matters he accepted, and would be "sufficient as a matter of law to allow for a conviction on the charge of a course of conduct involving a single crime being committed on a number of occasions".

In any event there was sufficient evidence for conviction on the permitted alternatives of a contravention of s 38 or 39 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010.

Click here to view the sheriff's note.

A decision to similar effect has been reached in an as yet unreported case noted in this month's Journal.

 

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