Please read the following before telephoning the Tribunal [0141 427 3036]:
Like any law court, the SCI Tribunal has to deal with many cases and people. The law itself requires that cases be started in the order in which they are submitted. It is therefore essential that the Tribunal staff be allowed to plan and administer their time wisely. No-one should be prejudiced because a disproportionate amount of time is being given to others who, simply by telephoning, demand it. Marriage nullity cases are understandably fraught with deep and painful emotions and sometimes this may lead a person to pick up the phone and speak in a way which is neither fair nor helpful.
In order to preserve order and decorum for everyone, the Tribunal telephone system works on the following guidelines.
Firstly, certain routine requests made by telephone, e.g. for the nullity application forms [which would be for someone with no internet access], are handled by an automated message inviting the caller to leave name and address, etc..
Secondly, inquiries about an ongoing case - which may only be made by a party to the marriage, not by a friend or relative, etc. - are also processed by inviting the caller to leave a phone message. This gives time to the administrative staff to source the case file and so to be fully informed of the current status of the case before returning the phone-call either by telephone or by email.
Thirdly, an automated message informs anyone who wishes to contact the Judicial Vicar or Presiding Judge that this must be done in writing.
On this last point, for the sake of the completeness of the case file, it is obligatory that any complaints, questions, etc., which are directed to the Judicial Vicar and/or Presiding Judge, leave a paper trail. Letters should be dated and signed in ink. Writing allows people to formulate their message carefully and precisely thus permitting a response in kind. It also means that there is no uncertainty or dispute as to who said what when, and avoids any suspicion that one party is receiving preferential treatment over the other. All written exchanges of this nature, but under the direction of the Judge, are entered into evidence so that, at the proper junction of the process, each party may see what the other has written in the exercise of their right of defence.