Kazemi was cleared of raping a teenage girl when she was 14 because of the 2002 amended appeal court ruling that redefined the law on rape in Scotland, while he was an Independent Councillor in Clackmannanshire.

He was, instead convicted on the lesser charge of sex with an under-age girl, but that brought a significantly reduced sentence, typically several years less if a custodial term is applied

Advocates and legal experts said at the time that the law on rape was now unravelling completely and predicted that a number of other defences would be argued on the same grounds. This meant that convicted rapists could have their sentence vastly reduced if there was no sign of cohersion other than the actual rape itself. A survey at the time found a clear majority of MSPs believed there was a need for parliamentary scrutiny of rape law because of the legal confusion.

The rape charge against Kazemi was dropped because of the appeal court ruling, which places an obligation on the prosecution to prove not only that the victim did not consent to sexual intercourse, but that the accused knew she did not consent.

The ruling, which acquitted John McKearney, a convicted rapist, clarified the current position on rape following amendments called for by Colin Boyd, the Lord Advocate, and agreed by a panel of judges in 2002. It was hoped that those changes, which removed the need for force from the definition, would have greatly improved Scotland's low rape prosecution rate, but legal experts say it has created more problems.

In the Kazemi case, Sheriff Rita Rae, a temporary High Court judge, read a copy of the McKearney ruling before addressing the court. The rape charge was then dropped on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to prove and corroborate the mens guilty state of mind element that was highlighted in the McKearney case.

One advocate said last night: "The rape element of the charge was thrown out specifically because of McKearney. This was resisted by the Crown. For the Crown to say the McKearney ruling has not affected decisions is misleading and wrong."

Following the 'chaos' created by the ruling, the Crown has maintained that this will not make it any more difficult to secure rape convictions. However, advocates say a number of trials could be dropped on similar grounds in the next few weeks and that several appeals have already been lodged.

Another senior advocate said: "We have heard that it (the ruling) has been taken up all over the place. Whether or not the Crown admits it, there will be a lot of cases coming up at the appeal court as well. Judges have been raising the point in court and there is no doubt that cases are folding because of this."

John Scott, Solicitor Advocate and head of the Scottish Human Rights Centre, said he was aware of at least one other case in which the rape charges were dropped because of the McKearney ruling.

A spokeswoman for the Crown Office said: "In this particular case, the Crown did not have enough evidence to prove consent. Our position on this has not changed at all."

However, Mr Scott pointed out: "The Crown cannot concede the point on this because, if they did, in theory they would have to put their pen through a lot of current High Court rape prosecutions."

Nicola Sturgeon, SNP justice spokeswoman at the time, said the latest case raised fresh concerns. She said: "My real concern is that, the way the law stands, it is virtually impossible to secure a rape conviction in cases where there is no evidence of physical force. It is virtually impossible to prove he knew she did not consent. We need to look at the law because otherwise our conviction rates are going to plummet and guilty men will walk free."

Kazemi was jailed for a total of 7 years.

Kazemi, a former councillor who filmed sex sessions with a woman and her daughter has failed to overturn his convictions for indecency. A jury jailed Faramarz Kazemi in 2004 for a total of seven years. He took part in three-in-a-bed sessions with the girl and her mother, took indecent photos and made videos. The court had heard the younger girl was molested on one occasion only when she was between 8 and 10.

A jury jailed shopkeeper Faramarz Kazemi in 2004 for a total of seven years. The trial heard Kazemi, of Tullibody, near Alloa, claimed he had been doing the teenage girl a favour because she wanted to lose her virginity. The 66-year-old has continued to protest his innocence. Kazemi was charged days after being elected to Clackmannanshire Council as an Independent for the Menstrie area. He resigned after being convicted.

Kazemi took his case to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh, claiming some of the charges should have been thrown out for legal reasons before the jury had their say, but Lord Osborne, sitting with Lords Macfadyen and Johnston, backed the trial judge’s original ruling.

The conviction depended on the court accepting the stories of two sisters, who both claimed Kazemi had molested them, which backed each other. Appeal judges ruled that the evidence of one could corroborate the other.

During the trial in 2004, the jury heard that the offences dated back to the 1980s and that some of the abuse took place in Kazemi's shop in Menstrie. The court had heard one sister was abused from the age of 6 until she was 16. Kazemi also took part in three-in-a-bed sessions with the girl and her mother, took indecent photos and made videos, the court was told. The court also heard the younger girl was molested on only one occasion, and that was she was between 8 and 10.