THE election agent for Govan MP Mohammed Sarwar yesterday won a court order which clears the way for her to put her name forward as a candidate for the Scottish Parliament.
It also means that a pending criminal charge against her at Glasgow Sheriff Court will now fall.
Lady Cosgrove accepted that Mrs Margaret Curran had made an honest mistake when she broke the law by failing to have Mr Sarwar's election expenses verified in the presence of a Justice of the Peace.
It also emerged during yesterday's hearing at the Court of Session that the JP who also failed to follow the correct procedure - Glasgow Labour councillor Stephen Dornan - is to be reported by the Lord Advocate to the Scottish Secretary, who is responsible for appointing magistrates.
Lady Cosgrove endorsed the Lord Advocate's action and described the JP's attitude as ''alarming and wholly inexcusable''. Mr Dornan told the court that he knew Mrs Curran's signature, regarded her as trustworthy and reliable and hadn't given ''a second thought'' to whether she should have signed in his presence.
Mrs Curran, 39, who gave evidence that she had not appreciated that she had to verify the expenses declaration in person before a Justice of the Peace, described yesterday's ruling as a vindication of her good faith. ''All I care about was that I was believed. I never thought for one minute I had done anything immoral or anything that I couldn't live with. I knew in my own heart that it was not a deliberate act and I'm gratified that the court believed that.
''It's good to have that official vindication that I acted in good faith.''
Mrs Curran, of Camphill Avenue, Langside, Glasgow, a lecturer in community education at Strathclyde University, had asked the court to excuse her for a breach of the Representation of the People Act 1983. It is believed to be the first petition of its kind in Scotland since 1921.
She raised the case after the procurator-fiscal in Glasgow charged her with having failed to deliver a true return of election expenses accompanied by a declaration made in the presence of a JP in June last year.
Mrs Curran told Lady Cosgrove that she had had been under pressure by the media because of allegations made after the election against Mr Sarwar and, on the day the return had to be sent in, had been distracted by her son's illness.
She had also failed to appreciate that she had to verify the declaration in person and because of a combination of these factors had arranged for Mr Sarwar to take the documents to be signed by Mr Dornan.
Miss Leeona Dorrian, QC, for Mrs Curran, said that while it might be difficult for lawyers to believe, people frequently failed adequately to read documents, even of the greatest importance.
The documentation made clear that the expenses declaration had be be signed in front of a JP but Mrs Curran had only ''skim read'' it.
If Mr Dornan had properly fulfilled his duties as a JP ''none of us would be here today''.
''It's no doubt a sad reflection on the calibre of JPs that Mr Dornan is thought to be one of the better ones. The evidence is that he was chosen because his local reputation was a good one.
''It's a very sad reflection,'' agreed Lady Cosgrove. ''Even at this stage he doesn't seem to have realised the import of his error.''
Mr Robert McCreadie, who appeared for the Lord Advocate, informed the court he entirely accepted what both Miss Dorrian and the judge had said about the JP.
''The Lord Advocate intends to refer the behaviour of the JP to the Secretary of State.''
However, Mrs Curran had also failed in one of her basic duties and the question for the court was whether her actions could be classed as inadvertence rather than gross carelessness.
Lady Cosgrove said, as far as Mrs Curran was concerned, she was prepared to accept that her failure to obey the law had arisen because of a lack of attention to the wording of the expenses declaration. There was also no evidence that she had acted in bad faith.
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 hereComments are closed on this article