This is the second fundraiser for the case MARTIN JAMES KEATINGS v (FIRST) THE ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND; (SECOND) THE LORD ADVOCATE; and (THIRD) THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS (Commonly referred to as "The Peoples Action on Section 30" case.)

The case is seeking a declarator of the Court, that the Scottish Parliament has the power to legislate for the holding of a referendum on whether Scotland should be an independent country, without requiring the consent of the UK government or any further amendment of the Scotland Act 1998 (the “1998 Act”).

Summary -

December 2019 : Our solicitor Elaine Motion of Balfour +Manson LLP,  instructs Aidan O'Neill QC to provide an opinion on the constitutionality of the Scottish Parliament legislating on a second referendum on Scottish Independence without the consent of Westminster, after yet another rejection of a section 30 order by the Prime Minister - This opinion is available here: Legal Opinion

January 2020 : We commence fundraising for the case reaching £43,658, of which £40,263.62 is transferred to the solicitors directly by CrowdJustice after deduction of appropriate fees. Transfer Confirmation

January 30th 2020: The Advocate General of the UK Government is issued with pre-litigation correspondence from our solicitors at Balfour+Manson and the Scottish Government are also copied into that correspondence. : Correspondence

February 14th 2020: UK Government responds by stating that they do not believe that the Scottish Parliament has the authority to legislate for a second referendum on Scottish Independence without the consent of Westminster (“Section 30 Order”).

March 20th 2020: A court summons is issued in the name of the Convener of Forward as One, overseeing the litigation. Court Summons

Since March 2020 we have had to deal with a number of administrative motions. The first was resisting a motion by the Scottish Government to halt proceedings for 3 months. We won this motion - and the 8 week "adjustment period" commenced, being the time in which parties refine their arguments. This ended on 22nd of July.

During this process, we were subject to another motion by the Scottish Government, which was ultimately dropped in the late stages, after our legal team had already had to invest a hefty amount of energy in working on it.

The third administrative motion, which was with respect to a protected expenses order – seeking to limit the costs of litigation -  has been refused by the court.

What are we trying to achieve? - To prove that a referendum on Scottish Independence can be legislated for at Holyrood without the consent of Westminster under the law as it currently stands.

What is the next step in the case? – The next step is preparation for a legal debate. At the moment we are unable to disclose the contents of the submissions by the opposing parties, until we have permission to do so. As always,  when this changes, our backers will be the first to know.

Our next stage is to lodge with the court- the "Open Record" which is, in effect, the respective arguments and submissions of all the parties to the case in one organised document. Its purpose is to allow easy reference to specific matters within those arguments for all parties (including the court). Once this is lodged, a legal debate hearing of 3 days will be scheduled.

In other words, to steal a quote from a certain politician: This case is now “oven ready” to proceed to oral arguments.

Why is this fundraiser running:

As we said previously, we would approach the movement for further fundraising when it became necessary. By way of an estimate. Total costs are projected by the court in the ruling on the protected expenses order to be somewhere in the region of £195,000 in total. We deduct from that total, the sum of £40,000 from the previous fundraiser and we are left with £155,000.

This is the target we are aiming for.

To be clear, if we do not reach our target, legal action will have to be discontinued.

The Teams

For a case like this, it's not just a case of one solicitor per party to the case. On our side we have a solicitor advocate working with a multitude of solicitors at partner and associate level, instructing an advocate and juniors. With the other parties, we have the Advocate General instructing senior counsel with junior counsel; and with the Lord Advocate and the Scottish Ministers, we have them instructing senior counsel with a solicitor-advocate. This doesn't even begin to account for all the other staff who assist. Costs obviously mount quickly. 

CrowdJustice

As with the last fundraiser, those donating are reminded of several things. Firstly, you cannot set up a fundraiser on CrowdJustice unless you have a verified legal counsel. CrowdJustice do not allow a fundraiser to launch without confirmation of this.

We never see the funds, the transfer of the funds is dealt with directly by CrowdJustice and our solicitors at Balfour + Manson LLP. Any unspent funds at the conclusion of the case are subject to Crowdjustice’s refund policy.

Initial Target & Stretch Target.

In order for funds to be transferred to the solicitors, it needs to hit the "initial target". We have set this target to £10,000 (which is way below what we are seeking). The target will then change to £155,000 when the fundraiser hits £10,000

We have opted to do it this way so we can leave the fundraiser open for longer and so people can continue to donate.