Appeal by MF in the summary application by City of Edinburgh Council in respect of MF (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 5 (13 February 2025)

The appeal was incompetent because the interlocutors under challenge were procedural and not decisions under the 2000 Act; section 2(3) does not confer a right of appeal against such procedural orders.

Citation: [2025] SACCIV 5
Parties: Respondent and Appellant: MF; Applicant and Respondent: City of Edinburgh Council; The Adult: VF
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 13 February 2025
Procedural Posture: Summary Application Under the Adults With Incapacity (scotland) Act 2000 / Appeal Against Interlocutors Refusing Procedural Motions and Ordering Disclosure of Address
Outcome: Appeal dismissed as incompetent
Legal Topics: Appeal Competency, Adults With Incapacity, Procedural Orders, Statutory Interpretation

Civil Procedure Mental Health Law Appeal Competency Adults With Incapacity Procedural Orders Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

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 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Respondent and Appellant

City of Edinburgh Council

Applicant and Respondent

The Adult

Procedural Posture

Summary Application Under the Adults With Incapacity (scotland) Act 2000 / Appeal Against Interlocutors Refusing Procedural Motions and Ordering Disclosure of Address

Legal Issues

1 Whether interlocutors refusing procedural motions and ordering disclosure of address are appealable under section 2(3) of the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as incompetent

Orders

Appeal refused as incompetent
Effective service may be made to any email address used by Mr F in submitting documents; onus is on him to provide an alternative if required