Judges have set a date to hear evidence in a legal challenge to the election of former Scottish secretary Alistair Carmichael.
A four-day Election Court hearing will take place at the Court of Session buildings in Edinburgh from November 9.
Four of Mr Carmichael's constituents, known as the petitioners in the case, have launched a bid to oust him after he admitted allowing the leak of a confidential memo which wrongly claimed First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to remain in Downing Street at May's general election.
Lady Paton and Lord Matthews today ruled that the next stage of proceedings could take place in the capital rather than in Mr Carmichael's Orkney and Shetland constituency.
Evidence given by witnesses will not be broadcast live as with earlier legal hearings, but submissions from each side in the case will be televised, they said during a procedural hearing at the court.
Lady Paton said: "The next stage of the trial comprises first evidence and witnesses and productions and second submissions.
"We are minded ... to permit live broadcasting of the submissions, including all references to what witnesses have said."
Lady Paton said questioning of witnesses would be "more adversarial than inquisitorial" with the possibility of "serious consequences" following the court hearing.
The presence of cameras would "create a risk to the proper administration of justice", she said.
The judge added: "We are content that special circumstances have been shown and that the next stage of the trial should take place in Edinburgh."
Mr Carmichael's legal team has been given until October 26 to lodge a list of witnesses they intend to call, which could include the MP.
Jonathan Mitchell QC, representing the petitioners, told the court: "I assume that they are calling him.
"Beyond Mr Carmichael it's not apparent to me that there is any other useful evidence that could be led on the respondent's side."
In a Channel 4 interview, Mr Carmichael initially denied having prior knowledge of the memo leak, which emerged around a month before voters went to the polls.
Following a Cabinet Office inquiry he admitted he had allowed his special adviser Euan Roddin to release details of the document which appeared in the Daily Telegraph on April 3.
The petitioners argue his actions call into question his integrity as an individual and his suitability to represent the constituency at Westminster.
Their action has been brought under Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983.
It states that ''a person who ... before or during an election, for the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at the election, makes or publishes any false statement of fact in relation to the candidate's personal character or conduct shall be guilty of an illegal practice''.
At earlier hearings Mr Carmichael's legal team asked the judges to throw out the case.
His counsel Roddy Dunlop QC argued that Section 106 should not apply to ''self-talking'', in this case the candidate making a false statement about himself rather than attacking someone else.
But last month the judges said they wanted to hear evidence in the case.
They ruled that the language used in Section 106 was ''wide enough to encompass a statement made by a candidate about himself''.
The judges also concluded that the law could apply "whether the statement can be regarded as attacking and vilifying or as praising and laudatory''.
The court will now hear evidence on whether Mr Carmichael's statement amounted to ''false statements of fact'' about his own personal character or conduct and whether they were uttered for ''the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at the election''.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel