SA against LT (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCPER 15 (04 November 2025)

SA against LT (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCPER 15 (04 November 2025)

It is not in the best interests of the children to have direct or indirect contact with the pursuer due to the established incident of violence by the pursuer against one child, the risk of abuse, the defender's inability to facilitate or supervise contact due to her mental health, and the clear and consistent wishes of the children not to have contact. The evidence did not support deprivation of the pursuer's parental rights or alteration of the children's surname. No order regulating the arrangements for the children's care and upbringing is necessary or proportionate.

Citation
[2026] SCPER 15
Parties
Pursuer: SA; Defender: LT
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Contact and Parental Rights / Final Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Contact order refused; no order made for deprivation of parental rights or change of surname; hearing assigned on expenses.
Legal Topics
Contact Orders, Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Child Welfare, Domestic Abuse, Best Interests of the Child
Family Law Child Law Contact Orders Parental Rights and Responsibilities Child Welfare Domestic Abuse Best Interests of the Child

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SA

Pursuer

LT

Defender

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Contact and Parental Rights / Final Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is in the best interests of the children for the pursuer to have direct or indirect contact with them
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer should be deprived of parental rights and responsibilities
  3. 3 Whether the children's surname should be altered

Ratio Decidendi

It is not in the best interests of the children to have direct or indirect contact with the pursuer due to the established incident of violence by the pursuer against one child, the risk of abuse, the defender's inability to facilitate or supervise contact due to her mental health, and the clear and consistent wishes of the children not to have contact. The evidence did not support deprivation of the pursuer's parental rights or alteration of the children's surname. No order regulating the arrangements for the children's care and upbringing is necessary or proportionate.

Court Disposition

Contact order refused; no order made for deprivation of parental rights or change of surname; hearing assigned on expenses.

Orders

  • Refusal of pursuer's crave for contact (direct and indirect) with the children
  • No order for deprivation of pursuer's parental rights and responsibilities