Scotland modernises criminal courts and abuse reviews

Scotland has a new justice law on the books. The Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Act 2025 passed Holyrood on 7 October 2025 and received Royal Assent on 19 November 2025, according to legislation.gov.uk. It does two things you’ll care about in class and in practice: it updates how criminal courts work in the digital age, and it creates a national system for learning lessons after domestic abuse deaths and linked suicides.

You’ll see changes arrive on two tracks. Many digital court provisions, including virtual attendance and electronic signing, start from 1 December 2025 (the later of that date or the day after Royal Assent). Other measures will be phased in by regulations. If you teach law, criminology or social policy, that means a clear point to update lesson notes and case studies this term.

On documents, courts can now accept electronic signatures for a wide range of criminal paperwork-orders, warrants, citations, minutes and more. The Act says a reproduced e‑signature on paper counts too. The Lord Justice General can publicly direct that specific document types are excluded, so we’ll watch for those directions to understand any limits.

Serving documents becomes simpler but still consent‑based. If a person-or their solicitor in the case-has indicated they’re willing to receive items electronically, service can happen by email or via a secure system. The Act even recognises a sender uploading a file to an agreed electronic storage system as valid transmission. For students, this is a live example of how ‘service’ evolves with technology while preserving fairness.

Attending court can now happen by video where it’s fair to do so. For hearings in which someone is due to give evidence, a judge may direct that the person need not attend in person if appearing by electronic means would not prejudice the case or the interests of justice. In proceedings where the only party is a public official, physical attendance is generally not required unless the court orders it. Directions can be made on a party’s motion or by the court itself.

Courts must let parties make representations before or immediately after any first direction on remote attendance, and any party can ask for that direction to be revoked. The Lord Justice General will issue guidance, and general directions can apply to groups of hearings, with reasons published. Practically, that means predictability for those planning hybrid hearings, but with a safety valve where fairness needs a face‑to‑face appearance.

If someone is excused from coming to court, they must appear by approved electronic means instead. The court’s direction must ensure that witnesses can be both seen and heard by the judge, the parties and, where applicable, the jury. Think of this as setting a minimum digital standard so that remote attendance replicates the essentials of a live courtroom.

Ministers must review these virtual attendance rules after two years of operation, consult justice bodies and the professions, publish a report and lay it before Parliament. That builds in accountability. It’s a useful research prompt: how do remote hearings affect participation, delay, and perceived fairness in Scotland?

Evidence rules get a digital refresh. An image of a physical item will usually be treated as the item itself unless the court directs otherwise to protect fairness. Time limits apply if a party wants to challenge using an image rather than the object. The law also recognises Scotland’s Digital Evidence Sharing Capability (DESC) as an official system for storing and sharing copies of documents used in criminal cases.

Linked to that, if a production is electronic, the accused only needs a proper opportunity to see it electronically rather than the item being lodged in the old way. Autopsy and forensic reports can be provided electronically too. This shift matters for you as learners: it’s about preserving scrutiny while reducing delay and chain‑of‑custody risks inherent in moving physical items around.

There is a clear rule for body‑worn video. When prosecutors lead recordings from police‑issued cameras, the displayed time, date and location count as sufficient evidence unless the accused serves notice disputing accuracy within seven days of disclosure and being told of their right to challenge. This speeds up uncontested points and keeps contested points in view.

On penalties, the standard fixed penalty maximum in the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 rises from £300 to £500, with ministers able to increase it further by regulations. Classroom question: do higher fixed penalties change behaviour, or is detection certainty the bigger driver? The Act gives you a current example to test.

Sheriff and justice of the peace courts gain flexibility to handle first appearances from custody anywhere in Scotland, including when a local building is closed by an emergency. A sheriff of any sheriffdom can deal with early stages, with clear points where the case must return to its usual forum once a not‑guilty plea is tendered and not accepted. The aim is simple: keep cases moving without losing jurisdictional safeguards.

For solemn cases, prosecutors can apply to add a new charge after serving the indictment if they could not reasonably have known about it earlier and moved as soon as practicable. The court must grant the application unless there is just cause not to, and must grant remedies-like an adjournment-if the defence would be prejudiced. Disclosure duties are updated to reflect any added charges. For you, this is a live example of balancing efficiency with fairness.

The Act also defines when a death linked to domestic abuse triggers a formal review. A “domestic abuse death” includes killings where a partner, ex‑partner, child, step‑child or a young person in the household has died, and certain suicides where abusive behaviour by Person A may have been a contributing factor. A “connected death of a young person” covers cases where a young person is killed in an incident that also caused a domestic abuse death. A “young person” includes care‑experienced young adults up to 26.

A new Review Oversight Committee will secure and supervise reviews. It includes nominees from local authorities, health boards, Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the legal professions, alongside representatives from voluntary organisations that support people in Scotland. For each case, a panel-led by an independent chair from a minister‑appointed pool-investigates and produces a report, with the Lord Advocate able to pause or discontinue a review to protect live investigations or court proceedings.

Reviews focus on learning, not blame. Reports set out key events, missed and taken opportunities to safeguard people, conclusions and recommendations. Publication needs the Lord Advocate’s consent and must protect anonymity. Organisations can be required to respond in writing to recommendations, and ministers must publish a public, anonymised summary of activity every two years, including numbers of referrals, reviews started and reviews completed. This is material you can turn into timelines, case‑mapping exercises and debates about what “learning” should look like in a justice system.