D.Y. v. L.Y. [2011] ScotSC 141 (31 August 2011)

D.Y. v. L.Y. [2011] ScotSC 141 (31 August 2011)

The court found that the pursuer's proposal to relocate the child to Ohio was reasonable, motivated by genuine concerns for the child's welfare and family ties, and not by a desire to frustrate contact with the defender. The arrangements for employment, accommodation, and schooling in Ohio were sufficiently researched and realistic. The child's wishes to relocate were genuine and sincerely held. Although relocation would significantly reduce direct contact with the defender, ongoing contact could be maintained through extended summer visits and regular indirect communication. The welfare of the child, as the paramount consideration, was best served by granting the specific issue order for...

Citation
[2011] ScotSC 141
Parties
Pursuer: DY; Defender: LY; Curator Ad Litem to LGY (minuter): Steven Thomas Gleeson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Relocation / Final Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Specific issue order granted for relocation; contact order granted for defender; no order as to expenses.
Legal Topics
International Relocation of Children, Specific Issue Orders, Contact Orders, Welfare of the Child, Parental Responsibility
Family Law Child Law International Relocation of Children Specific Issue Orders Contact Orders Welfare of the Child Parental Responsibility

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DY

Pursuer

LY

Defender

Steven Thomas Gleeson

Curator Ad Litem to LGY (minuter)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Relocation / Final Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer should be granted a specific issue order permitting relocation of the child LGY to the United States of America with the pursuer
  2. 2 Whether ongoing contact with the defender should be ordered and in what terms
  3. 3 What arrangements are in the best interests of the child

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the pursuer's proposal to relocate the child to Ohio was reasonable, motivated by genuine concerns for the child's welfare and family ties, and not by a desire to frustrate contact with the defender. The arrangements for employment, accommodation, and schooling in Ohio were sufficiently researched and realistic. The child's wishes to relocate were genuine and sincerely held. Although relocation would significantly reduce direct contact with the defender, ongoing contact could be maintained through extended summer visits and regular indirect communication. The welfare of the child, as the paramount consideration, was best served by granting the specific issue order for...

Court Disposition

Specific issue order granted for relocation; contact order granted for defender; no order as to expenses.

Orders

  • Grants the pursuer's second crave for a specific issue order allowing the child LGY to relocate with the pursuer to the United States of America, subject to the contact order made in favour of the defender.
  • Grants the defender's third crave and the minuter's second crave for contact, providing that the child shall have direct residential contact with the defender in Scotland for at least two weeks during the child's school summer holidays each year, and indirect contact by telephone, e-mail, and Skype at least once...