[302C Recall of fixed penalty or compensation offer]
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (1995 c 46) | Legislation

[302C  Recall of fixed penalty or compensation offer]

[(1)     Where an alleged offender is deemed to have accepted—

(a)     a fixed penalty offer by virtue of section 302(2)(ca)(ii) of this Act; or

(b)     a compensation offer by virtue of section 302A(2)(d)(ii) of this Act,

the alleged offender may request that it be recalled.

(2)     A request for recall under subsection (1) above is valid only if—

(a)     the alleged offender claims that he—

(i)     did not receive the offer concerned; and

(ii)     would (if he had received it) have refused the offer; or

(b)     the alleged offender claims that—

(i)     although

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Novation—why and how to novate a contract

Novation—why and how to novate a contractThere may be times when, rather than assigning the benefit of an agreement to a third party, the original parties wish instead to end their obligations to each other under that agreement and, in effect, recreate it, with the third party stepping into the

LEXISNEXIS

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ rule

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleCosts determination and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleAn issue for practitioners is whether correspondence marked ‘without prejudice’ can be used against a party when the court comes to determine the issue of costs. The Court of Appeal in Walker v Wilsher (1889)

LEXISNEXIS

PRA Rulebook—introduction for the insurance and reinsurance sector

PRA Rulebook—introduction for the insurance and reinsurance sectorOn 29 August 2015, the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the PRA Rulebook (Rulebook). The transition from the Handbook to the Rulebook was intended to benefit PRA-authorised firms, to access clearer and more concise

LEXISNEXIS

Standard of care in professional negligence claims

Standard of care in professional negligence claimsThis Practice Note considers the standard of care in professional negligence claims, originally formulated in Bolam v Friern Hospital as being that of reasonable skill and care but now reconsidered following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health. It