A A v. B B + MARCO HIGGINS [2013] ScotSC 59 (12 September 2013)

A A v. B B + MARCO HIGGINS [2013] ScotSC 59 (12 September 2013)

The sheriff's interlocutor of 10 May 2013 was an order for interim contact only, not an order ad factum praestandum, as it did not require performance of a specific act. Therefore, leave to appeal was required and not obtained, rendering the appeal incompetent.

Citation
[2013] ScotSC 59
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: A A; Defender and Appellant: B B; Curator Ad Litem and Respondent: Marco Higgins
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Note of Appeal in Family Law (child Contact) Proceedings / Appeal Against Interim Contact Order; Determination of Competency of Appeal Without Leave
Outcome
Appeal refused as incompetent due to lack of leave to appeal.
Legal Topics
Child Contact, Interim Orders, Appeal Competency, Leave to Appeal
Family Law Civil Procedure Child Contact Interim Orders Appeal Competency Leave to Appeal

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A A

Pursuer and Respondent

B B

Defender and Appellant

Marco Higgins

Curator Ad Litem and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Note of Appeal in Family Law (child Contact) Proceedings / Appeal Against Interim Contact Order; Determination of Competency of Appeal Without Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal is required for an interlocutor granting interim contact in child welfare proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the interlocutor constitutes an order ad factum praestandum

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff's interlocutor of 10 May 2013 was an order for interim contact only, not an order ad factum praestandum, as it did not require performance of a specific act. Therefore, leave to appeal was required and not obtained, rendering the appeal incompetent.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused as incompetent due to lack of leave to appeal.

Orders

  • Adheres to the sheriff's interlocutor of 10 May 2013.
  • No expenses due to or by any party in respect of the appeal.