LEM v. PDC [2004] ScotCS 199 (23 June 2004)
The pursuer failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defender intended to remove the children from her care or from Scotland, or that there was a reasonable basis for apprehension of future molestation. The evidence did not support granting the unusual remedy of permanent interdict.
- Citation
- [2004] ScotCS 199
- Parties
- Pursuer: LEM; Defender: PDC
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 23 June 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil (family Law) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
- Outcome
- Defender assoilzied (absolved) from the conclusions of the summons; interdicts refused.
- Legal Topics
- Interdict, Molestation, Child Abduction, Parental Rights, Supervision Requirements
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
LEM
Pursuer
PDC
Defender
Procedural Posture
Civil (family Law) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether permanent interdict should be granted to prevent the defender from removing the children from the pursuer's care or from Scotland
- 2 Whether permanent interdict should be granted to prevent the defender from molesting the pursuer
Ratio Decidendi
The pursuer failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defender intended to remove the children from her care or from Scotland, or that there was a reasonable basis for apprehension of future molestation. The evidence did not support granting the unusual remedy of permanent interdict.
Court Disposition
Defender assoilzied (absolved) from the conclusions of the summons; interdicts refused.
Orders
- Repel first and second pleas-in-law for the pursuer
- Sustain first plea-in-law for the defender
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment