Thread by @jamesdoleman

Virtual proceedings begin. The presiding judge is Lady Dorian, The Crown is represented by the Advocate Depute, Alec Prentice QC, The Spectator by Ronald Clancy QC

Counsel for the Spectator is applying for changes to the court order, passed during the Alec Salmond trial, to prevent the identification of the complainers in that case.

(I'm not going to tweet too much detail about this for obvious reasons, I've also limited replies for the same reason)

Counsel for the Spectator now discussing the Holyrood inquiry into the Alex Salmond civil case which is currently ongoing.

The Advocate for the Spectator says there is a clear public interest in altering the current court order.

(Some details being discussed now that I'm not going to tweet about)

Lady Dorian is challenging the Counsel for the Spectator's interpretation of the procedures of the Holyrood enquiry.

Clancey says that he has seen indications that the Holyrood inquiry is interested in clarification of the extent of the court order currently in place banning the publication of any information that might lead to the identification of the complainants in the Alex Salmond case.

Lady Dorian asks that shouldn't this be a matter for the committee not this court?

Clancey raises the Spectator's rights under article 10 of the Human Rights Act.

Correction, article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Mr Clancey now going over various legal precedents to support his application.

Counsel for the Spectator now going over the limits of the courts section 11 powers to prevent publication of certain information.
Lady Dorian notes difference in English and Scottish law in this matter, as England has a statutory ban on naming alleged victims of sex crimes

Clancey says that if you are passing legislation that may lead to people suffering legal sanction it is vital that people clearly understand what they can and can't publish.

Lady Dorian reminds Clancey that these proceedings are being conducted in public and suggests that "care is needed."

Lady Dorian says Clancy's suggestion of how people might interpret her order would be an "absurd reading."

Court takes a short break.

Proceedings resume, Lady Dorian says she thinks Clancy's suggestion of a change to the wording of the order might just "compound the problem."
Says she will deliver her reasons in writing.

Lady Dorian says it is not "self evident,' that her order would stop the Holyrood inquiry considering the evidence of Mr Salmond.
Counsel for the Spectator says the inquiry may be being "over cautious"

Lady Dorian says she will consider the need for further clarification of the scope of her order, but adds where would it end if the court had the keep varying the order as someone else could come along next week with another set of documents, "the order is the order."

The judge asks counsel "what is it you intend to achieve?"

Clancy says to allow the inquiry to publish the Salmond submission.
Lady Dorian asks if the committee could not just redact what they published, or just consider the material without publishing it?

Judge adds that The Spectator could then publish an article criticising the approach so bringing the issue into the public domain, she continues saying "these proceedings are not a conduit to the [inquiry] committee."

"I can't give the committee advice on how to accomplish their task" Lady Dorian says.

"It's not my job to make this clear to them," Lady Dorian adds.

Counsel for the Spectator again raises his clients article 10 rights under the European convention, says the risk of identifying the complainers is "slight."
Lady Dorian says "this court isn't making any reporting restrictions on the committee."

Clancy says if the court can take an early lunch break so he can take further instructions.
Lady Dorian asks for the Advocate Depute's view on the proposed change to the order.

Alec Prentice says the Crown has no objections to the proposed change to the order in order to clarify the situation.
Court adjourns until 1.30