Scottish DR: civil appeals and judicial review

This subtopic provides guidance on how to appeal decisions of the Court of Session and sheriff courts in Scotland and how to challenge the decisions of public bodies by way of judicial review.

For guidance on other key aspects of Scottish civil litigation, see the following overviews, which link through to more detailed guidance:

•
Scottish DR: key developments—overview
•
Scottish DR: courts and civil procedure—overview
•
Scottish DR: prescription and limitation—overview
•
Scottish DR: starting a claim—overview
•
Scottish DR: case management and evidence—overview
•
Scottish DR: expenses and funding—overview
•
Scottish DR: claims and remedies—overview
•
Scottish DR: enforcement—overview
•
Scottish DR: settlement and ADR—overview

Civil appeals in Scotland

For a broad outline of the civil appeal court structure in Scotland, see: Civil court structure in Scotland—flowchart and Practice Note: Civil court structure in Scotland.

The Sheriff Appeal Court (civil) hears appeals against certain decisions of the sheriff courts in Scotland. It came into being in 2016 as part of Scottish civil court reforms.

In civil matters, the Inner House of the Court

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Dispute Resolution News

MoJ announces Court Funds Office interest rate reductions following BoE decision

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced interest rate reductions for Court Funds Office (CFO) accounts, effective 9 January 2026, following the Bank of England (BoE)’s base rate decrease on 18 December 2025. The Special Account rate has been reduced from 4.0% to 3.75%, while the Basic Account rate has been decreased from 3.0% to 2.81%. The MoJ states that these adjustments are designed to cover CFO operating costs while keeping interest rates affordable for clients.

Court of Appeal allows appeal regarding interim relief in age assessment case (Derby City Council v R (on the Application of UYR)

Local Government analysis: The Court of Appeal has allowed Derby City Council’s (DCC’s) appeal concerning an order for interim relief granted in the context of a judicial review claim against it. While the court dismissed the first ground, the second ground of appeal succeeded, with the court finding that the judge had erred ‘in considering that the provision of accommodation by Manchester City Council was precarious, and [the judge] ought to have held there was no real risk that the claimant would cease to be accommodated as a child pending resolution of the judicial review proceedings’ so that the balance of convenience came down against ordering interim relief against DCC. This case provides a comprehensive analysis of the relevant principles and case law concerning applications for interim relief in a judicial review claim, and specifically interim relief age assessment cases. Written by Nicola Wheater, associate at HCR Law.

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—8 January 2026

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the speech of the President of the King’s Bench Division at the Mayflower Lecture 2025 on artificial intelligence and the Court of Appeal decision in Afan Valley Ltd v Lupton Fawcett LLP (appeals); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

The Law Society’s AI strategy and response to government

The Law Society has responded to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology’s call for evidence on the AI Growth Lab, stressing the need for a proportionate regulatory approach that supports innovation while maintaining professional standards. In a press release dated 6 January 2026, the sector’s widespread willingness to embrace lawtech was highlighted, with two-thirds of lawyers said to ‘already use AI tools in their work’, alongside an ongoing uncertainty as to the risks and ‘exact requirements for data security, oversight and liability’. Separately, The Law Society’s ‘Introduction to lawtech’ guide published on 29 December 2025 observed that client demand for ‘greater efficiency, transparency and cost control, especially in corporate legal services’ has been a key driver for AI usage, with larger firms leading adoption and medium-sized firms catching up. The Law Society says it will continue to work with the government to ensure AI benefits both firms and clients, with its strategy focused on the following three key outcomes: i) innovation in legal service delivery; ii) an effective AI regulatory landscape, influenced by the legal sector; and iii) integrity through responsible AI use, supporting the rule of law and access to justice. Links to consultation responses and downloadable submissions on a range of AI-related issues, including data processing, ransomware resilience and the use of AI outputs in criminal proceedings (among others), are included on The Law Society’s ‘AI and lawtech: government policy and regulation’ page (updated on 18 December 2025), which also invites members to share their views and identify any gaps in support or guidance.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

News