The Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 19 November 2025, confirming permanent digital measures in criminal procedure and creating a statutory system of domestic homicide and suicide reviews. The Bill passed at Stage 3 on 7 October by 115 votes to nil, with 14 not voting.
Electronic signatures now meet any statutory or rule‐based signing requirement for a wide class of criminal court documents, with the definition aligned to section 7(2) of the Electronic Communications Act 2000 and extended to signatures reproduced on paper. Courts and parties may also give documents electronically, including by uploading to a system from which the recipient can download, provided the recipient has indicated willingness to receive in that way. The Lord Justice General may publicly direct exclusions for specified document types.
Service to a solicitor acting in the proceedings is expressly valid and the Act clarifies that “giving” a document covers service, sending and lodging with the court. In practice, Crown Office and defence firms should record consent routes and retention policies for electronic transmission to avoid dispute over receipt. The provisions repeal earlier piecemeal service provisions in the 1995 Act, consolidating practice around a single framework.
Virtual attendance is placed on a clear statutory footing. Courts may disapply physical attendance, case by case, where attending by electronic means would not prejudice fairness or the interests of justice. Where the only party is a public official, physical attendance is disapplied by default unless the court directs otherwise. The Lord Justice General may issue determinations to disapply physical attendance for categories of persons, hearings or proceedings; parties can seek revocation, and any guidance must be made public.
Scottish Ministers must review the operation of the virtual attendance provisions within two years of commencement, consulting the Lord Justice General, SCTS, Police Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Legal Aid Board, the Law Society and the Faculty of Advocates. A report must be published and laid before Parliament, giving practitioners a medium‑term feedback loop on what has worked and where court directions may need refinement.
Digital productions are normalised. An image of physical evidence is, unless a court directs otherwise on application, to be treated as if it were the item itself. The Act sets time‑limits for applications to require production of the original item and obliges the Lord Advocate to publish guidance on prosecutorial factors when relying on images. For electronic productions, the accused must be given a reasonable opportunity to view in electronic form.
A new evidential rule for body‑worn video reduces routine proof burdens: where prosecution footage is led and time, date or place are displayed, those details count as sufficient evidence unless the defence serves notice disputing accuracy within seven days of disclosure and written intimation of the right to dispute. Ministers may, by regulations, modify who counts as a camera user.
Fiscal fines are uplifted. The maximum fixed penalty under section 302 of the 1995 Act rises from £300 to £500, with a nine‑level scale from £50 to £500. Ministers can further increase the maximum by regulations. This makes permanent levels used temporarily during the pandemic period.
Custody callings gain national jurisdiction. Initial appearances from police custody may be taken in any sheriff or JP court and, in defined circumstances, continued there. The procurator fiscal determines the venue; safeguards limit continuation where a not‑guilty plea is tendered and not accepted. Transitional provision ties off cases already moved under pandemic‑era powers. This aims to maintain throughput during closures or local pressure.
Prosecutors gain a tightly‑bounded power to add charges to an indictment after service. The court must grant an application if the prosecutor could not reasonably have been aware of the conduct before service and applied as soon as reasonably practicable, normally at least two months before the trial diet, unless just cause exists to refuse. Related disclosure duties are adjusted to avoid duplication where information has already been provided.
A statutory framework for domestic homicide and suicide reviews is established. A Review Oversight Committee, with independent chairs and representation drawn from nominations by public bodies and voluntary organisations, will decide whether to commission Case Review Panels after notifications from Police Scotland, the Lord Advocate or the PIRC. Reviews focus on lessons to improve safeguarding and victim wellbeing, not attribution of liability.
To protect live proceedings, the Lord Advocate can suspend or discontinue reviews, and a protocol between the Committee, Police Scotland, COPFS and Ministers must manage information‑sharing and avoid prejudice. Designated core participants, including local authorities, health boards, Police Scotland, the SPA, SCTS and others, are under a duty to co‑operate and provide information. Reports may be published with the Lord Advocate’s consent; individuals must not be identifiable, and addressees of recommendations can be required to respond.
Commencement is staggered. Final provisions take effect the day after Royal Assent. Key operational measures-electronic signatures and service (sections 1–3), the fixed‑penalty uplift (section 6), national custody jurisdiction (section 7 and its transitional), and linked transitional provisions-begin on the later of the day after Royal Assent and 1 December 2025, i.e. 1 December 2025. All other provisions, including the review regime, start on dates to be appointed by Ministers.
Implications for practice are immediate. Prosecutors and defence teams should refresh service protocols, build seven‑ and twenty‑eight‑day evidential challenge checks into case workflows, and prepare template motions on virtual attendance and digital productions. Courts will need to publish practice guidance aligned to the Lord Justice General’s determinations. Public authorities and third‑sector providers should identify leads for the review system, assemble data‑sharing arrangements consistent with the forthcoming protocol, and plan for participation duties once commencement regulations are made.