A quick update of Mr. Matheson's case. I learn from The Metro this morning that Mr. Matheson, the former Head of Hermitage Academy, has been struck off as a teacher for pockling money given by the ice cream van for renting space in the playground.

Labels: Education Law, News

The former Head Teacher of Hermitage Academy, Donald Matheson, failed to appear at his disciplinary hearing before the General Teaching Council yesterday (9 March 2010).

The Daily Record, which covered the story tells how Matheson had a sick note, but sent his lawyer to protest his innocence. The hearing heard evidence in his absence from office manager Mrs. Maureen Purves.

Mrs. Purves gave evidence that in October 2003 an ice cream van moved into the grounds. She said: "Mr Matheson told us the ice cream man would be bringing in money on a regular basis."

"They would come in on a Friday or whatever day was the end of that school week. It was always in denominations of £10 per day."

Clerical assistant Ann Holmes gave evidence that Mr. Matheson gave her an envelope full of notes totalling £1,650 the day auditors showed up to examine the books in May 2005.

She said: "He said I was to be sure to bank this money that day and put it under donations from the ice cream van."

Criminal fraud charges against Mr. Matheson were dropped in 2006 because of witness problems. That same day, he retired on full pension from his £70,000-a-year post at Hermitage.

None of which is in the least bit suspicious.

The hearing, which could decide to remove his name from the register of teachers altogether, continues.

I used to go to Hermitage Academy, though not during Mr. Matheson's tenure. My favourite purchase from the ice-cream van was those little 5p bags of pickled onion crisps.

Labels: Education Law, News

You can now read my latest Yell.com blog post, all about new wheel clamping powers for the Scottish Court Service to assist in collecting unpaid fines. It's called: New wheel clamping powers in Scotland.

If someone were to clamp our car, I'd be delighted as the value of the clamp would be more than that of the car!

Labels: criminal law, Glasgow, Scottish Court Service, Yell.com Solicitors Blog

Now that Scotland is enjoying it's very own Da Vinci mystery, I thought I should have a shot at unravelling the tale for you. This potted version is taken from various newspaper reports I have been reading over the past few days. Are you sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin...

Once upon time there was a Duke, and the Duke had a very expensive painting of Jesus, and his Mum (that is to say, the Virgin Mary, not the Duke's Mum). Anyway, some bad men stole the painting, and this made the Duke very sad (not to mention about £50 Million poorer). Needless to say, the little gnomes who worked for his insurance company were not too pleased about it either.

Because the Duke had never seen The Thomas Crown Affair, or Entrapment or Ocean's Twelve or any of the other classic art theft movies (like Bean) he doesn't appear to have invested in even basic security devices like infra-red trip wires or anything. The bad men stole the painting by basically lifting of the wall in the Duke's nice house (well, enormous Castle really), climbing through his window and waving an axe at a startled gardener.

Anyway, even though the police looked really hard, they couldn't find the painting anywhere. This made the Duke even sadder, and he died about four years later, still wondering where his lovely painting might now be.

Then some very clever lawyers got involved. One lawyer was contacted by some mysterious people (who were definitely not the bad men who stole the painting, but nonetheless didn't really want anyone to know exactly who they were). The mysterious people said they had the Duke's painting (although they didn't say how they had got it).

So the clever lawyer told the mysterious people that as the painting was stolen, they should give it to the police immediately so that the Duke's family could have it back.

Sorry, my mistake! Actually, what the lawyer did was to get in touch with some more lawyers who had a think about what would be the best thing to do. The best thing, they decided, was to contact the insurance company gnomes, and ask them if the Duke's family would be interested in having their painting back? And also ... if the family might be willing to pay the mysterious people a reward of, say, £4.25 Million?

The insurance gnomes asked why the mysterious people didn't just tell the police about the painting. But the clever lawyers were worried that the mysterious people were a little bit volatile and might do something "very silly" with the painting if the police wanted to take it away from them (like, for example, wearing it as a dress).

But insurance gnomes aren't stupid, so they pretended not to call the police - and actually they did call the police. And the police prentended to be the Duke's servants while they went to (and covertly filmed) a meeting at the offices of some very respectable and clever lawyers in Glasgow. The clever lawyers wanted to drink some tea and talk about the reward for the mysterious people, but the Duke's servants (who were really the police in disguise) had come with a warrant, and only wanted to get the Duke's painting back, and arrest everyone - without waiting for them to finish their tea.

The painting of Jesus and his Mum playing with some wool doesn't stay at the Duke's Castle any more. It has gone to live at a big Museum with laser beams and guard dogs (probably) - where it will be nice and safe. And the mysterious people and their clever lawyers have gone to court, where a serious judge and fifteen nervous jurors have to decide whether they should go to jail for a very long time.

Even though, as the clever lawyer's clever lawyer (Donald Findlay QC) says, there was "Nothing covert, nothing secretive, nothing, on the face of it, underhand about this at all."

According to Wikipedia, the painting of Jesus and his Mum playing with some wool is called The Madonna of the Yarnwinder (Madonna dei Fusi). It depicts the Virgin Mary with the Christ child, who looks longingly at a yarnwinder which the Virgin could use to measure off yarn. The yarnwinder serves as a symbol both of Mary's domesticity and the Cross on which Christ was crucified, and may also suggest the Fates, understood in classical mythology as spinners.

Labels: criminal law, Glasgow, law firms, News

A Scottish businessman's ex-lover has claimed £500K compensation from him for having to live in the Highlands.

The red-tops in Scotland today were full of the tale of the high-value "divorce" between Julie Anne Zelent and former Inverness Caledonian Thistle FC Chair Alan Savage.

Although they were never married (she says they discussed tying the knot, he denies this) family law is now such that cohabiting partners can claim a financial settlement if sharing bed and table doesn't work out as planned. So, Ms. Zelent is suing her former lover for damages, including the costs to her - she claims - of having to live in Inverness. These include the job she quit to move there and other "economic disadvantage".

Still, it could have been much, much worse. Imagine how much she could have sued for if she'd had to move to Coatbridge!

• Ex wants £500000 ... for living in Inverness The Sun, 3 March 2010;
• Tycoon sued by former lover for £500k for 'cost of moving to Scotland' Daily Record, 3 March 2010.

Labels: Family Law, News

Look at me! Look at me! I'm in the Scotsman, and on St. David's Day as well - how ironic.

In case you're wondering why I'm not quoted, it's because I forgot to phone the journalist back until he'd gone on holiday! So the following has been cribbed directly from our website, I think.

" Mr Nisbet is a partner at GLC and head of its national Education Law Unit, which he set up in 2002 soon after joining GLC. He acts for parents and pupils in education cases involving discrimination or additional support needs, but also offers training or advice on all aspects of education law to education bodies and schools. "

PS. Just realised that the heading is richer in innuendo than I had intended. No matter - you know what I meant!

Labels: Law Centres, News

I see from a number of blogs (mostly from India, for some reason) Michael Mancini has evaded justice.

As you may remember, Mr. Mancini was the motorist issue with a £60 fixed penalty notice for not being in control of his vehicle while blowing his nose in a traffic jam. Outraged, he refused to pay.

He was prepared to face the judgement of the court but prosecutors in Ayrshire decided to take no further action. He is quoted as saying "I'm relieved it's now all behind me and I've cleared my name. I was determined to fight this and go to court because I know I did nothing wrong,"

It was also reported that the police officer who issued out the notice has earned the nickname "PC Shiny Buttons" for his over-zalous approach to policing. This is the same man, apparently, who last year issued a £50 fixed penalty to a man who accidentally dropped a £10 note in the street.

Of course, that guy's not my favourite policeman. No, that would be these guys ...

Labels: criminal law, Just for Fun, News