A court has upheld a Scottish government appeal in a row over documents related to an inquiry into Nicola Sturgeon's handling of the Alex Salmond affair.

The Scottish Information Commissioner had ordered ministers to publish papers from the Hamilton Inquiry – the investigation into whether then first minister Sturgeon had misled MSPs over the probe into claims against her predecessor.

The Scottish government insisted that doing so would breach court orders guaranteeing the anonymity of women who lodged complaints against Salmond.

The Court of Session backed the ministers' appeal, ruling Information Commissioner David Hamilton had erred in law.

Salmond was initially investigated by the Scottish government in 2018, after complaints were made about his conduct.

But he successfully took ministers to court, arguing the process was "tainted by apparent bias" and unlawful.

Following a separate criminal investigation he was cleared of sexual assault charges at the High Court in 2020, four years before his death.

This was followed by a Holyrood inquiry into the botched government probe, and Sturgeon referred herself for investigation by James Hamilton KC - no relation to David - who ultimately cleared her of breaching the ministerial code.

A freedom of information (FOI) request was later made to the Scottish government for all evidence used in Hamilton's investigation, and there have been a series of legal disputes about whether this information can be published.

Following Salmond's acquittal of criminal charges, judge Lady Dorrian had put contempt of court orders in place which prohibited people from naming the women who had complained about him.

That ban also prevented anyone from disclosing single pieces of information that could be used together to work out the identities of the women, in so-called "jigsaw identification".

David Hamilton had ordered ministers to hand over documents, but saw this challenged in court by the Scottish government.

They asked judges Lord Pentland, Lord Malcolm and Lady Wise to overturn parts of the commissioner's decision on the grounds that disclosing the information would place the women at risk of identification.

In a written judgement, Lord Pentland upheld the government's case, ruling the release of documents could "permit assumptions to be made" about the identities of the complainers.

Lord Pentland cited a case involving the political blogger Craig Murray, who was jailed for eight months after being found guilty of contempt of court relating to a series of articles he published online in the wake of Salmond's trial.

Prosecutors raised concerns the complainers could be identified by his writing.

Lord Pentland concluded that by applying the Murray precedent, the commissioner had no basis to order the disclosure.

Lord Pentland wrote: "The issue of jigsaw identification was clearly in play before the commissioner.

"It would be unrealistic and contrary to principle for this court not to apply the law as stated in that case."

He added: "It would be unconscionable for this court to ignore what was authoritatively stated in that case about the meaning and purpose of the various orders pronounced in the civil and criminal proceedings arising out of the investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by Salmond."

Responding, the Information Commissioner's Office said it welcomed the clarity offered by the court ruling.

It said Hamilton would "reflect fully on the implications" of it before reassessing the original freedom of information cases.

A Scottish government spokesperson said: "The Scottish government welcomes the decision of the Court and will continue to uphold the court orders to protect the identities of women in cases of alleged sexual crimes."