Visión para el Grupo Regional AVSEC/FAL/RG OACI/CLAC

4.2.1 The Basis of the Right to Self-represent

The right of a party to represent himself in civil court proceedings is so fundamental to Scots law that it is often taken for granted. The right to self- represent today is drawn from the Scots Acts 1532512 which also established the basis for the Court of Session.513 _{Chapter 51 reads: “That na man pley bot}

512  _{Attributed  to  1537;  see  also  Secretary  of  State  for  Business,  Enterprise  and}  

Regulatory  Reform  v  UK  Bankruptcy  Ltd  [2011]  SC  115.  

513  _{See  Hannay  R,  The  College  of  Justice:  Essays  on  the  Institution  and  Development  of}  

parties and their procuratoures514 Item, That na man enter to pley bot parties conteined in their summoundes, and their procuratoures, gif they will ony have.” In other words, the right to plead a case belongs to the parties to an action or an advocate, and no one else. Further provisions of the Act also refer to the delivery of bills of continuation515 and the examination of witnesses516 as being carried out by “parties or their procuratoures.” Self-representation was envisioned in the earliest stages of Scottish civil court system as we know it today. Although the Act is now nearly 500 years old, it was observed as recently as 2010 that is has not fallen into desuetude.517

Even in the absence of this express authority, self-representation is also part of the constitutional right of access518 _{to the courts.}519 _{The right of access is}

perhaps best expressed as the State’s duty not to create barriers or impede access to the courts.520 _{More recently, with the abolition of employment tribunal}

fees, the Supreme Court has made clear that any serious hindrance can be an impediment to access to the courts, even if it does not make access entirely impossible.521 _{It is thus generally taken for granted in the Scottish courts that a}

party litigant is allowed, or indeed “entitled,”522 _{to act on his own behalf.}523 _{It is}

perhaps because this entitlement has been taken for granted for centuries that the precise nature of the right remains nebulous.

4.2.2 Limitations on the Right to Self-represent                                                                                                                

514  _{“Procuratoures”  refers  to  advocates.}   515  _{Scots  Acts  1532,  Chapter  52.}  

516  _{Ibid,  Chapter  53.}  

517  _{Secretary  of  State  for  Business,  Enterprise  and  Regulatory  Reform  v  UK  Bankruptcy}  

Ltd  2011  S.C.  115  at  page  123.  

518  _{See,  for  example,  Bremer  Vulcan  Schiffbau  und  Maschinenfabrik  v  South  India}  

Shipping  Corp  [1981]  AC  909.  

519  _{See,  for  example,  Lord  Advocate  v  Rizza  [1962]  SLT  (Notes)  8.}  

520  _{Per  Lord  Justice  Laws,  Children's  Rights  Alliance  for  England  v  Secretary  of  State  for}  

Justice  [2013]  EWCA  Civ  34  at  para  37.  

521  _{R  (On  application  of  Unison)  v  Lord  Chancellor  [2017]  3  WLR  409  at  para  78.  Any}  

such  hindrance  must  be  authorized  by  primary  legislation.  

522  _{Per  Lord  Chancellor  (Viscount  Simon)  in  Equity  and  Law  Life  Assurance  Society  v}  

Tritonia,  Ltd  [1943]  SC  (HL)  88  at  page  89.  

523  _{“It  is  clear  beyond  doubt  that  an  individual  party  who  is  a  natural  person  does  not}  

require  to  be  represented  by  a  lawyer”;  per  Lord  Macfayden,  Cultural  and  Educational  

The right to self-represent is virtually absolute and there are only a few

exceptions. One of these is that, unsurprisingly, litigants who lack legal capacity may not self-represent. Thus, for example, children524 _{and adults with}

incapacity525 may not act as party litigants. Those resident in a “hostile territory” in wartime are also excluded.526 This is the full extent on the

limitations placed on self-representation for individuals. The most far-reaching exception, however, is non-natural or “artificial” persons, such as limited

companies, trusts or partnerships. The default rule is that artificial persons may not self-represent in any forms of action other than the simple procedure.527

To understand the bar on self-representation for non-natural persons, it is helpful first to consider how such litigants are conceptualised in Scots law. An artificial entity is incapable of being a “party litigant.” Sheriff Principal Dick observed in Bargeport Ltd v Adam, “A limited company is not a party litigant and has no right of audience in the Sheriff Court…A limited company is a ‘person’ in law but not a party litigant”.528 When a non-natural person is

unrepresented, neither the entity nor anyone purporting to represent the entity, such as a director or employee, can be considered a party litigant. An

unqualified person who appears can only do so as a lay representative. Lay representation for artificial entities is allowed in some low-value claims procedures.529 _{The general rule, however, is that non-natural persons must be}

represented by a solicitor or advocate to ensure that the representative is able to serve the court, is aware of the law and procedure and is subject to

524  _{A  parent  has  the  right  to  act  as  the  child’s  legal  representative  (Children  (Scotland)}  

Act  1995  s1(1).  A  child  may  instruct  a  solicitor  to  carry  out  civil  proceedings  on  his   behalf  provided  he  has  an  understanding  of  what  it  means  to  do  so  (Age  of  Legal   Capacity  (Scotland)  Act  1991  s2(4A)).  

525  _{Adults  who  are  subject  to  an  order  under  the  Adults  with  Incapacity  (Scotland)  Act}  

2000.    The  capacity  of  a  litigant  may  also  be  challenged  in  the  course  of  an  action.  

526  _{They  do  not  have  the  right  of  access  to  the  courts;  see,  for  example,  Sovfracht}  

(V/O)  Appellants;  v  Van  Udens  Scheepvaart  en  Agentuur  Maatschappij  (N.V.  Gebr.)   Respondents  [1943]  AC  203.  

527  _{Simple  Procedure  Rules  Part  2.  Prior  to  the  introduction  of  the  simple  procedure,}  

lay  representatives  could  appear  for  companies  only  at  certain  types  of  hearings.  

528  _{Bargeport  Ltd  v  Adam,  unreported,  Glasgow  Sheriff  Court,  15  February  1985,  as}  

quoted  in  Dana  Ltd  v  Stevenson  [1989]  SLT  (Sh  Ct)  43  at  page  44.  

529_{For  an  example  of  how  lay  representation  for  a  company  can  go  wrong,  see  Libby}  

professional rules and disciplinary codes.530 This has been upheld despite no shortage of challenges, including those from a company,531 a partnership,532 a club,533 _{a voluntary association}534 _{and the Scottish Gas Board.}535 _{A representative}

of the entity may not sign documents such as an initial writ commencing an action on its behalf.536

It is only very recently that this has begun to change. In Secretary of State for

Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform v UK Bankruptcy Ltd,537 the court

noted that, under certain conditions, an absolute bar on lay representation could lead to a breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.538 _{However, the court declined to change the rule using either its}

inherent power or by making an act of sederunt, considering it a matter to be legislated. The Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 introduced new provisions allowing for lay representation of non-natural persons,539 _{subject to a number of}

qualifications. The representative must hold a relevant office, such as director or secretary in the case of a company.540 The court must be satisfied that the representative is suitable and that allowing them to act is in the interests of justice.541 _{Unlike the rules for lay representation of an individual, the court must}

also find that the non-natural person is unable to pay for the services of a legal representative542 and must have regard for the complexity of the proceedings                                                                                                                

530  _{Equity  Law  and  Life  Assurance  Society  v  Tritonia  Ltd  1943  SC  (HL)  88.  It  has  been}  

noted  that  this  rationale  could  equally  be  applied  to  cases  involving  party  litigants   who  are  natural  persons;  see  Clark  Advertising  Ltd  v  Scottish  Enterprise  

Dunbartonshire  [2004]  SLT  (Sh  Ct)  85  at  pages  87-­‐88.  

531  _{Apollo  Engineering  Ltd  (in  liquidation)  v  James  Scott  Ltd  [2012]  SC  282.}  

532  _{Clark  Advertising  Ltd  v  Scottish  Enterprise  Dunbartonshire  [2004]  SLT  (Sh  Ct)  85.}   533  _{Strathclyde  RC  v  Sheriff  Clerk,  Glasgow  [1992]  SLT  (Sh  Ct)  79.}  

534  _{Cultural  and  Educational  Development  Association  of  Scotland  v  Glasgow  City}  

Council  [2008]  SC  439.  

535  _{Scottish  Gas  Board  v  Alexander  [1963]  SLT  (Sh  Ct)  27.  In  this  case  an  employee}  

who  also  happened  to  be  an  advocate  was  not  allowed  to  represent  the  pursuer,  as   she  was  not  appearing  in  her  capacity  as  a  member  of  the  Faculty.  

536  _{Cultural  and  Educational  Development  Association  of  Scotland  v  Glasgow  City}  

Council  [2008]  SC  439.  

537  _{[2011]  SC  115.}  

538  _{Article  6  is  discussed  further  below.}  

539  _{Courts  Reform  (Scotland)  Act  2014  s97;  lay  representation  in  simple  procedure,}  

which  replaces  the  current  low-­‐value  claims  procedures,  is  dealt  with  in  s96.  

540  _{Ibid,  s95(5)(a).}   541  _{Ibid,  s97(3)(b-­‐c).}   542  _{Ibid,  s97(3)(a).}  

and the non-natural person’s prospects of success.543 Rules of court and forms have now been introduced to implement these provisions, 544 but to date there has not been any reported case law on its application. The terms of the statute and the rules, however, suggest that lay representation for companies is

intended to be the exception, rather than the rule.