Taylor V. Cameron [2007] ScotSC 52 (24 September 2007)

Taylor V. Cameron [2007] ScotSC 52 (24 September 2007)

The court refused the motion to allow a late appeal because the decree and extract were validly obtained, there was no sufficient irregularity in service, and the grounds advanced were not competent grounds of appeal but amounted to reponing considerations, which are excluded in family actions. The finality of a valid extract cannot be undermined by alleged irregularities at earlier stages.

Citation
[2007] ScotSC 52
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Paul Taylor; Defender and Appellant: Linda Elizabeth Cameron or Taylor
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Divorce Appeal / Appeal Against Decree of Divorce; Motion to Allow Late Appeal
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Divorce, Appeals, Time Limits, Extract Decree, Service of Process
Family Law Civil Procedure Divorce Appeals Time Limits Extract Decree Service of Process

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Taylor

Pursuer and Respondent

Linda Elizabeth Cameron or Taylor

Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Divorce Appeal / Appeal Against Decree of Divorce; Motion to Allow Late Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can allow a late appeal against an extracted decree of divorce under Ordinary Cause Rule 31.1 and Rule 2.1
  2. 2 Whether there was an irregularity in service sufficient to invalidate the decree and extract
  3. 3 Whether the grounds of appeal amount to reponing considerations, which are excluded in family actions

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the motion to allow a late appeal because the decree and extract were validly obtained, there was no sufficient irregularity in service, and the grounds advanced were not competent grounds of appeal but amounted to reponing considerations, which are excluded in family actions. The finality of a valid extract cannot be undermined by alleged irregularities at earlier stages.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • Refuses the defender and appellant's motion to allow an appeal to be marked late
  • Makes no order in relation to expenses