McKerrow v. Crawford [2004] ScotSC 1 (06 January 2004)

McKerrow v. Crawford [2004] ScotSC 1 (06 January 2004)

The appeal was refused because the sheriff's decision that it was not in the child's best interests to make a contact order was reasonable, given the lack of any prior relationship between the pursuer and the child, concerns about the pursuer's behaviour, and the absence of evidence that the problems identified by expert reports had been addressed. The welfare of the child required that no order be made at this time.

Citation
[2004] ScotSC 1
Parties
Pursuer: Brian McKerrow; Defender: Susan Crawford
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff's Interlocutor
Outcome
appeal refused
Legal Topics
Contact Orders, Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Welfare of the Child, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Child Law Contact Orders Parental Rights and Responsibilities Welfare of the Child Appeal Procedure

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian McKerrow

Pursuer

Susan Crawford

Defender

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing a contact order between the pursuer (father) and the child Emma
  2. 2 Whether the welfare of the child required a contact order to be made
  3. 3 Whether the sheriff gave undue weight to the mother's wishes and insufficient weight to the father's rights

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was refused because the sheriff's decision that it was not in the child's best interests to make a contact order was reasonable, given the lack of any prior relationship between the pursuer and the child, concerns about the pursuer's behaviour, and the absence of evidence that the problems identified by expert reports had been addressed. The welfare of the child required that no order be made at this time.

Court Disposition

appeal refused

Orders

  • Amendment of findings in fact as specified
  • Refusal of appeal and adherence to sheriff's interlocutor