Smart v HM Advocate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scots law This article is part of the series: Courts of Scotland

Administration Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice Judicial Appointments Board Scottish Court Service College of Justice Office of the Public Guardian Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission Scottish Prison Service

Civil courts Privy Council House of Lords Court of Session Lord President Lord Justice Clerk Lords of Session Office of the Accountant of Court Sheriff Court Sheriff

Criminal courts High Court of Justiciary Lord Justice-General Lord Justice Clerk Lords Commissioner of Justiciary Sheriff Court Sheriff Principal Sheriff District Court Justice of the Peace

Special courts Court of the Lord Lyon Lord Lyon King of Arms Scottish Children's Reporter Administration Children's Hearings Scottish Land Court Lands Tribunal for Scotland

Criminal justice Lord Advocate Crown Office Advocate Depute Procurator Fiscal

Advocates and solicitors Faculty of Advocates Advocate Law Society of Scotland Solicitor-Advocate Solicitor

Smart v HMA was a Scottish criminal case decided by the High Court of Justiciary on appeal held that it is not a defence to a charge of assault that the injuries were caused in the course of a consensual fight. This is known as the 'Square Go' case, where those involved agreed to a 'square go' outside the pub where they were drinking.

The court held " “it is in the public interest that it should be decided and made known that consent to a 'square go' is not a defence to a charge of assault based on that agreed combat.”

The situation was different with indecent acts or injuries caused in the course of organised sports, such as boxing.

This case is reported at 1975 JC 30.