Brian MacGregor sued the chief constable, claiming a Standard Prosecution Report (SPR) prepared by the police was deliberately false and misleading, arguing that officers failed to investigate key evidence that could have undermined the complainer’s credibility. He contended that the police acted with malice due to antecedent ill-will stemming from his previous criticism of the local police force.

The defender argued that MacGregor’s case lacked specification and that the expert report prepared by Mr. Christopher was inadmissible due to his lack of relevant Scottish police experience. Lord Clark ruled that the SPR showed the police had not properly investigated MacGregor’s defence, which could have impacted the credibility of the complainer.

He acknowledged difficulties in causation but allowed the case to proceed, noting that the Crown’s judgment could still be affected by the police’s failure to investigate. He also excluded significant portions of the expert report as inadmissible and suggested a revised version be prepared.