Scottish court says “Aye” to e-mail – but only just!

legal updates

From time to time though we dip our toes into the chilly waters of the Scottish legal procedure.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

Lawgistics are specialists in the English and Welsh legal systems and – on behalf of our many clients – are regularly e-mailing the courts with a variety of documents such as Defences and Witness Statements.

From time to time though we dip our toes into the chilly waters of the Scottish legal procedure and we did so recently when drafting a Defence (or a “Response” as it is known across the border) to a claim against a car dealer in Fife.  The court papers gave an e-mail address of the court – Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court – and to there the form was e-mailed, duly signed by our client.  

We were surprised to receive an e-mail from the court to say that they did not accept documents sent by e-mail and asked for a postal version.  This was promptly done.  However, our client went on to receive a letter with the posted Response returned – the court had rejected it because it had been received out of time!   Upon contacting the court, they agreed to accept the e-mailed version of the Response (which had been sent in time) but their advice to me then was as clear as it is from me to you now – ALWAYS POST YOUR DOCUMENTS TO THE SCOTTISH COURT SO IT ARRIVES ON TIME AS E-MAIL is NOT appropriate.

And I encourage all Scottish readers to bear this in mind – even if the court documents a) give an e-mail address of the court and b) does not tell you that you must post them!


Leading experts in print, promotional clothing, staff uniforms, branded merchandise and PPE. Involution is your brand partner for promotional marketing and workwear, a one-stop-shop for your branded marketing needs for any business size and industry.

Jason WilliamsLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

An eventful small claims hearing

Discover how a simple oversight in witness representation and off-screen coaching at a remote hearing can dramatically impact legal outcomes, underscoring the critical need for adherence to procedural rules and proper pre-action conduct in our latest insightful article.

From initial complaint to court claim form – let us help you

You can feel assured that court deadlines are attended to with the required attention and specialism.

Is it time to ditch “Dear Sirs”?

Clearly, “Dear Sirs” is old-fashioned, but is it sexist?

Location, Location, Mislocation: A costly oversight in court attendance

What the unfortunate Claimants (husband and wife) had not appreciated, was that the hearing was listed for the court at Central London.

Court re-instates a claim because of its own error!

One wonders how many times the courts have made the same error.

To Be or Not To Be Remains the Legal Question

The Claimant had sought to reject a commercial van that he had been using for business purposes but alleged that he was a consumer.

Always Deal with Court Documents

This cost our member an application fee to the court, plus a legal representative at court for the hearing.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

01480 455500

Vinpenta House
High Causeway

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.