A bench of nine judges made the ruling on 30 October 2024 on an appeal from Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain KC in relation to two cases which resulted in ‘not proven’ verdicts.

The judges ruled, by a majority of eight to one, that a victim’s statements made during or shortly after a crime, when the victim is still suffering the effects of what has happened, can provide a second source of evidence that that crime took place, and that the accused was responsible.

Previously it was long established law that two statements from the same person could not be used to corroborate each other.

Stuart Munro, convener of the Law Society’s Criminal Law Committee, said: “This judgement from the Lord Justice General and his colleagues in the High Court is highly significant and is bound to have far-reaching consequences.

“While the basic rule that crimes have to be proved by corroborated evidence hasn’t changed, this decision, and others like it, show that the court’s view on what can amount to corroboration has shifted considerably.

“Many cases that were previously thought to have insufficient evidence will now be capable of being prosecuted.

“Corroboration is painted by some as being a unique feature of Scotland’s criminal justice system, but we’re also the only jurisdiction that allows conviction by simple majority verdict.

“We now have a fundamental change to our criminal justice system in an area where parliament considered change but thought better of it.”