APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 93(2)(a) AND 94(2)(a) OF THE CHILDREN'S HEARINGS (SCOTLAND) ACT 2011 IN RELATION TO A and B [2014] ScotSC 113 (17 November 2014)

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 93(2)(a) AND 94(2)(a) OF THE CHILDREN'S HEARINGS (SCOTLAND) ACT 2011 IN RELATION TO A and B [2014] ScotSC 113 (17 November 2014)

Jurisdiction over the children was accepted by the Scottish court as it was in their best interests, following a reasoned request from the German court under Article 15 of Brussels II bis, and in light of the children’s presence and integration in Scotland, absence of opposition from German authorities, and risk of detriment if jurisdiction was not accepted.

Citation
[2014] ScotSC 113
Parties
Reporter: Rankin; Mother: Bell; Safeguarder: Perry; Child: A; Child: B
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 93(2)(a) and 94(2)(a) of the Children's Hearings (scotland) Act 2011 / Jurisdiction Determination and Directions for Proof
Outcome
Jurisdiction accepted by Scottish court, subject to children’s hearing decision; directions given for proof; interim compulsory supervision orders extended.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Bis, Transfer of Proceedings, Habitual Residence, Child Abduction, Interim Compulsory Supervision Orders
Family Law International Law Child Protection Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Bis Transfer of Proceedings Habitual Residence Child Abduction Interim Compulsory Supervision Orders

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rankin

Reporter

Bell

Mother

Perry

Safeguarder

A

Child

B

Child

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 93(2)(a) and 94(2)(a) of the Children's Hearings (scotland) Act 2011 / Jurisdiction Determination and Directions for Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Scottish courts have jurisdiction over children wrongfully removed from Germany
  2. 2 Whether transfer of jurisdiction under Article 15 of Brussels II bis should be accepted
  3. 3 Procedural deficits in Scottish system for international child cases

Ratio Decidendi

Jurisdiction over the children was accepted by the Scottish court as it was in their best interests, following a reasoned request from the German court under Article 15 of Brussels II bis, and in light of the children’s presence and integration in Scotland, absence of opposition from German authorities, and risk of detriment if jurisdiction was not accepted.

Court Disposition

Jurisdiction accepted by Scottish court, subject to children’s hearing decision; directions given for proof; interim compulsory supervision orders extended.

Orders

  • Directions for proof on grounds of referral
  • Extension of interim compulsory supervision orders for children