Records of the Baron court of Stitchell, 1655-1807;

"Introduction" by George Gunn: p. ix-xxxix.

Session cases. Cases decided in the Court of Session, and also in the Court of Justiciary and House of Lords.

Imprint varies.

The trials of James, Duncan and Robert M'Gregor, three sons of the celebrated Rob Roy, before the High court of justiciary, in the years 1752, 1753, and 1754. To which is prefixed a memoir relating to the Highlands, with anecdotes of Rob Roy and his family.

Trials for the abduction of Jean Key Wright.

Records of the Sheriff Court of Aberdeenshire,

Vols. 1-2, only 500 copies printed, no. 409; v. 3, only 475 copies printed no. 490.

Trial of A.J. Monson,

Mode of access: Internet.

Report of the trial of the students on the charge of mobbing, rioting, and assault, at the college, on January 11 & 12, 1838.

"Mr. S. M'Gregor was employed to take the evidence and speeches in short-hand."-Notice.

Report to the Right Hon. the Lord Chief Baron, and the Hon. the Barons of His Majesty's Court of Exchequer in Scotland, by the King's Remembrancer, relative to the tomb of King Robert the Bruce, and the Cathedral Church of Dunfermline.

Mode of access: Internet.

The politicization of youth crime in Scotland and the rise of the 'Burberry Court'

In 2003, the youth justice system in Scotland entered a new phase with the introduction of a pilot youth court. The processing of persistent 16 and 17 year old (and serious 15 year olds) represented a stark deviation from a ‘child centred’ and needs-oriented state apparatus for dealing with young offenders to one based on deeds and individual responsibility. This article, based on an evaluation funded by the Scottish Executive, is the first to provide a critical appraisal of this youth justice reform. It examines the views of the judiciary and young offenders and reveals that the pilot youth court in Scotland represents a punitive excursion that poses serious concerns for due process, human rights and net widening.

Action for libel : report of the case of Angeli v. Galbraith, as tried before the lord chief justice at the Kildare summer assizes, 1856 and before the lord chief baron in the Court of Exchequer, at the after-sittings, Michaelmas term, 1856 /

Errata slip inserted.

The Employers' liability act, 1880, and the Workmen's compensation act, 1906. With the statutes relating to and cases decided on the previous Workmen's compensation acts in England, Scotland, and Ireland; the County court rules of procedure under the act of 1906; the Home office regulations and forms. /

Includes index.

The order of keeping a court leet & court baron, with the charges appertaining to the same (1650 ed.)

By John Kitchin. - cf. Dictionary of anonymous and pseudonymous English literature, by S. Halkett and J. Laing.

The Royal kalendar, and court and city register for England, Scotland, Ireland, and the colonies.

Vols. for 1837-52 include the Companion to the Almanac, or Year-book of general information.

The correspondence of Robert Bowes of Aske, esquire, the ambassador of Queen Elizabeth in the court of Scotland.

"The earlier portion is derived from letters, many of them originals, deposited in The Cottonian and Harleian collections in the British museum. The latter portion is transcribed from a contemporaneous manuscript [owned by John Bowes ... of Streatlam castle]"--Pref., p. ix.

Catalogue of Suffolk manorial registers, royal grants and deeds, court-baron, leet, and rent rolls, surveys, letters, papers, seals, engravings, drawings, autographs, and other authentic documents: collected for the purpose of illustrating a history of the county, in the possession of William Stevenson Fitch, of Ipswich. Part first.

No more published?

Evaluation of the Hamilton Youth Court Pilot 2003-2005

Pilot Youth Courts were introduced at Hamilton Sheriff Court in June 2003 and at Airdrie Sheriff Court in June 2004. Although introduced as one of a number of measures aimed at responding more effectively to youth crime (including young people dealt with through the Children’s Hearings System), the Youth Courts were intended for young people who would otherwise have been dealt with in the adult Sheriff Summary Court. The objectives of the pilot Youth Courts were to: • reduce the frequency and seriousness of re-offending by 16 and 17 year old offenders, particularly persistent offenders (and some 15 year olds who are referred to the court); • promote the social inclusion, citizenship and personal responsibility of these young offenders while maximising their potential; • establish fast track procedures for those young persons appearing before the Youth Court; • enhance community safety, by reducing the harm caused to individual victims of crime and providing respite to those communities which are experiencing high levels of crime; and • test the viability and usefulness of a Youth Court using existing legislation and to demonstrate whether legislative and practical improvements might be appropriate. Evaluation of the Hamilton and Airdrie Sheriff Youth Court pilots suggested that they had been successful in meeting the objectives set for them by the Youth Court Feasibility Group. Both were tightly run courts that dealt with a heavy volume of business. The particular strengths of the Youth Court model over previous arrangements included the fast-tracking of young people to and through the court, the reduction in trials, the availability of a wider range of resources and services for young people and ongoing judicial review. The successful operation of the pilot Youth Courts was dependent upon effective teamwork among the relevant agencies and professionals concerned. Good information sharing, liaison and communication appeared to exist across agencies and the procedures that were in place to facilitate the sharing of information seemed to be working well. This was also facilitated by the presence of dedicated staff within agencies, resulting in clear channels of communication, and in the opportunity provided by the multi-agency Implementation Groups to identify and address operational issues on an ongoing basis. However, whether Youth Courts are required in Scotland or whether procedural improvement were possible in the absence of dedicated resources and personnel was more difficult to assess. Two issues in particular required further attention. First, consideration needed to be given to whether the Youth Courts should be more explicitly youth focused and what this might entail. Second, greater clarity was required regarding for whom the Youth Courts were intended. This suggested the need for further discussion of Youth Court targeting and its potential consequences among the various agencies concerned.