Judgment day has been postponed in a spiralling case between Aberdeenshire Council and a group of Travellers on the Angus and Mearns border.
A civil dispute between the local authority and Gypsy Traveller James McCallum was further delayed on Thursday after Sheriff Chris Shead “reluctantly” approved a motion to adjourn the case at Stonehaven Sheriff Court.
Defence agent for Mr McCallum, Nick Whelan, made the motion to postpone through solicitor Angela McLarty, which stood unopposed by Aberdeenshire Council’s Robin Taylor.
The decision now means that Stonehaven Sheriff Court could be closed indefinitely as part of the Scottish Government’s cost-saving revamp of the court system before a legal verdict is reached in the case.
Sheriff Shead said: “The court’s anxiety is the imminent closure of the court and that this has gone on for a long time already.
“There is the need for an evidence hearing but that will not last more than two hours. It is certainly a matter that could go on beyond the closure of the court.
That would be months and months beyond the application and the breach of the order.”
Mr Whelan lodged the motion as he was unavailable to attend the hearing due to other legal commitments in Tayside.
Ms McLarty was sent as his replacement but told the court she had no previous dealings with the matter and was not adequately prepared to represent Mr McCallum.
The case began last year after Mr McCallum and a number of families from the Travelling community built an unapproved caravan park on a patch of private land near the St Cyrus Nature Reserve last September.
The council obtained an interim interdict order from Stonehaven Sheriff Court to prohibit work at the site but claimed the order was breached and began court proceedings against Mr McCallum.
Evidence was to be led for the first time in the case yesterday but new dates will have to be found after Aberdeenshire Council failed to oppose the motion lodged by Mr Whelan.
Sheriff Shead added: “The issues involved in this are relatively narrow. There have been cases where the court can see that there is an importance to someone having a particular solicitor. I’m not immediately persuaded that this is one of those cases.
“On the other hand it’s difficult to see the matter going ahead without Mr Whelan as it places Mr McCallum in a difficult position.
“I will discharge this with reluctance and see if a date can be fixed before the closure of the court.
“If Mr Whelan is unavailable on the next date then this case will have to proceed.”