Lawyers for eight teenagers who pleaded guilty to a litany of crimes have challenged the proceedings, alleging faulty paperwork

The youths, who originally pleaded guilty at Elgin Sheriff Court to 91 offences, were referred to a higher court for stiffer penalties.

However, their lawyers have now challenged the validity of the procedures used in the case.

The list of offences was believed to have been one of the longest ever put before a Scottish court.

It is in my submission a fundamental attack on these proceedings

Matt Jackson, defence counsel

The offences in Elgin and Lossiemouth included car theft, house breaking, vandalism and assault between January 2001 and March 2002.

At the youths' trial, it took more than three hours to describe their crimes and the group, aged between 14 and 19, smirked and joked with each other.

They appeared at the High Court in Edinburgh on Friday where the judge was told by the defence counsel for one of the youths that the original indictment, which sets out the charges, was incomplete.

It was stated in court that key words, fundamental to the prosecution of the case were missing from the formal conclusion.

Matt Jackson, defence counsel for one of the youths, Kris Orton, referred to the indictment and said: "It is not signed at its conclusion 'By Authority of Her Majesty's Advocate'."

Original indictment

It had been signed by a procurator fiscal depute and the words 'By Authority' did appear, but the phrase 'of Her Majesty's Advocate' did not follow on.

Mr Jackson argued that under terms of the 1995 Scottish Criminal Procedure Act, provision was made that indictments in sheriff and jury cases should be signed by the fiscal with the wording 'By Authority of Her Majesty's Advocate' attached.

"It is in my submission a fundamental attack on these proceedings," he told the court.

The defence counsel said the matter had come to his attention only in the last few days.

The case was moved to the High Court

He said it had not previously been raised at sheriff court level and asked for more time to prepare his arguments.

Other defence lawyers expressed similar concerns.

Lord Abernethy agreed to continue the case and said: "If the legal argument is sustained there will be no question of sentence."

The judge said that if the defence lost the debate a further day would be required to deal with the case because of the number of charges and accused.

Last month, Sheriff Kenneth Forbes said they should be sent to be dealt with by a High Court judge because he considered his maximum power of sentence - three year's detention - was insufficient to deal with the case.

The indictment against the teenagers originally contained 146 charges.