Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill, the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, and two consultations

The public policy update provides a look back to November and December and the work of the many Society committees. This round-up features the Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill, the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, as well as the Making Work Pay consultation and the Scottish Building Safety Levy Consultation.

Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

In advance of the Stage 3 debate on the Judicial Factors (Scotland) Bill in the Scottish Parliament, the Law Society of Scotland issued a briefing in support of the Bill and agreeing that the law relating to the judicial factor regime is in need of modernisation.

The briefing welcomed the amendments made to the Bill at Stage 2, which address many of the principal concerns raised by the Society at Stage 1. It particularly welcomed the changes relating to data protection legislation; the definition of financial assets in Section 13; and the interaction with the complaints process for solicitors.

The Society also welcomed the amendments proposed ahead of Stage 3, particularly those to Section 31 of the Bill. It considered that these amendments will address the potential difficulties it identified in previous engagement and ensure that the recall and discharge process operates smoothly with no gap in the administration of the estate.

Find out about the Law Society’s work on the Bill and read the briefing in full

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill

Stuart Munro, convener of the Law Society of Scotland’s Criminal Law Committee, appeared before the Scottish Parliament’s Criminal Justice Committee on 4th December to provide Stage 2 evidence on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill.

In its first hearing since the Scottish Government announced its proposal for a pilot of single-judge trials was being dropped from the Bill, the committee focused on ongoing plans to abolish the not proven verdict, change jury majority rules and establish a dedicated sexual offences court.

Stuart told the committee that Scotland’s unique and complex criminal justice system depends on a number of interlinked features to maintain its integrity and explained that if one of these features is removed – in this case, the not proven verdict – the implications need to be given full and serious consideration.

He told the committee that alongside a recent High Court decision in relation to corroboration, the proposed changes would mean that convictions based on a simple majority, or 10 out of 15, did not provide adequate safeguards.

Find out more about the evidence session and the Law Society’s work on the Bill

Making Work Pay consultations

Across December 2024, the Law Society of Scotland’s Employment Law Sub-Committee responded to three UK Government Making Work Pay consultations.

In response to the consultation on strengthening remedies against abuse of rules on collective redundancy and fire and rehire, the committee acknowledged that most employers comply with their collective consultation obligations. Proposals to increase or remove the cap on the protective award would potentially penalise compliant employers who have inadvertently breached their obligations, rather than the rare and egregious cases in which employers deliberately choose not to follow their obligations.

The committee disagreed with the idea of making interim relief available to those who bring protective award claims for a breach of collective consultation obligations, because such claims are often brought by trade unions/employee representatives, on behalf of a group of employees, rather than individual employees.

The response incorporated a number of suggestions including the inclusion of remote workers in collective redundancy consultations and revising the definition of ‘establishment’ to include a statutory definition akin to a business unit or division.

Read all three submissions on the Law Society’s website

Scottish Building Safety Levy consultation

The Law Society of Scotland’s Tax Law Sub-Committee responded to the Scottish Government’s consultation on the proposed introduction of a Building Safety Levy on new residential development in Scotland. Its response stressed the importance of clarity in the law in order that individuals and businesses can guide their conduct appropriately.

The committee also emphasised the need for clarity regarding who will be liable to pay the Scottish Building Safety Levy (SBSL) and how those funds are used to remediate buildings within the scope of Cladding Remediation Programme.

The response noted the importance of clarity and easy identification of those who are subject to an exemption and a robust business impact assessment to inform the scope of any exemptions.

On the proposal of a sunset clause, the committee suggested that since the rationale for the introduction of the SBSL is to support the funding of cladding remediation in Scotland, it would therefore be appropriate for the SBSL to cease to operate once this objective has been fulfilled.

The response suggested that, for practical reasons, it may be appropriate for any sunset clause or end date to be linked to the progress of the Cladding Remediation Programme, or the requirement of the SBSL as a source of funding.

Read the committee’s full response

Find out more about the Law Society of Scotland’s work to influence law and policy