Section 275: No Reform Two Months After Supreme Court Ruling
January 2026 Update – Still No Emergency Action or Public Timeline from Scottish Government
As of mid-January 2026, more than two months after the UK Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Daly and Keir v HM Advocate [2025] UKSC 38, there has been no emergency legislation, published implementation timetable, or systematic review of convictions potentially affected by Scotland’s restrictive approach to section 275.
The Supreme Court found that the prevailing Scottish practice under section 275 (the “rape shield” provisions) was liable to infringe defendants’ rights to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR. While the specific appeals were dismissed on their facts, the Court explicitly stated that the current approach should be modified to avoid systemic risks. (For full judgment text, see the official UK Supreme Court website.)
Defence practitioners and academics had flagged these issues for years. For more detailed background on how section 275 applications have been handled (and undercounted) in practice, read our earlier analysis: SCTS Section 275 Undercounting – What the Numbers Hide.
Evidence Categories at Risk of Exclusion
The Court and legal commentary noted that overly rigid exclusion can limit access to material that may affect credibility or provide context, including:
- Prior inconsistent statements or changes in accounts
- Medical or psychological background that could offer alternative explanations
- Digital records or communications showing a different narrative
These issues risk creating an imbalance in trials, as highlighted in the judgment.
Despite the ruling, public responses have emphasised continuity, stability and careful consideration of resources and court backlogs. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) has indicated it is preparing for potential referrals linked to section 275 concerns. For reflections from those affected by the broader justice system, see the Nameless Truth Project.
“The prevailing Scottish approach should be modified” – UK Supreme Court, November 2025
Timeline of Key Developments
| Period | Key Developments |
|---|---|
| Pre-2020 | Concerns raised by defence practitioners and academics about increasingly restrictive section 275 applications. |
| 2020–2023 | Appeal cases and commentary flag risks to Article 6 fair trial rights from evidence exclusions. |
| March 2025 | UK Supreme Court grants permission to appeal in Daly and Keir, highlighting section 275 concerns. |
| Nov 2025 | Judgment Issued: Appeals dismissed on facts, but Court states prevailing approach “liable to breach Article 6” and should be modified. |
| Jan 2026 | No emergency reform or public timeline announced; SCCRC preparing for potential referrals. Related: recent changes to Not Proven verdict – read our coverage. |
The Need for Transparency and Reform
Protecting complainers from irrelevant or abusive questioning remains essential. At the same time, fair trial rights under Article 6 ECHR must be upheld for all parties.
In the public interest, clear next steps are needed: published guidance for courts, a transparent implementation plan, and consideration of reviews for potentially affected cases. For ongoing discussion and support options, see our petition page: Petition for Fair Trial Safeguards.
This article expresses opinion on matters of legitimate public interest, based on the published UK Supreme Court judgment in Daly and Keir v HM Advocate [2025] UKSC 38 and publicly available information. It is not a statement of fact alleging criminality, corruption, or personal wrongdoing by any individual or body. Readers should refer to official sources for full context.