Gow v Grant (Scotland)

Gow v Grant (Scotland)

The Supreme Court held that section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 should be interpreted broadly, focusing on fairness and the effect of the parties' actions rather than intention. Economic disadvantage suffered by a cohabitant in the interests of the other or the relationship, even if mutual, can justify...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Mrs Gow; Respondent: Mr Grant
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (family Law) / Supreme Court Appeal From Inner House, Court of Session
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Cohabitation, Financial Provision on Relationship Breakdown, Economic Disadvantage, Compensation for Cohabitants
Family Law Cohabitation Financial Provision on Relationship Breakdown Economic Disadvantage Compensation for Cohabitants

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 16
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Gow

Appellant

Mr Grant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (family Law) / Supreme Court Appeal From Inner House, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Interpretation of section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 regarding financial provision for cohabitants on relationship breakdown
  2. 2 Whether intention to benefit the other cohabitant is necessary for a claim under section 28
  3. 3 Whether actual economic benefit to the defender is required

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 should be interpreted broadly, focusing on fairness and the effect of the parties' actions rather than intention. Economic disadvantage suffered by a cohabitant in the interests of the other or the relationship, even if mutual, can justify an award. The sheriff's award to Mrs Gow was within her discretion and based on a fair assessment of the facts. The Inner House erred in adopting a narrow interpretation requiring intention to benefit the defender.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Inner House interlocutor recalled
  • Sheriff's award of £39,500 to Mrs Gow affirmed