MS v. MM [2005] ScotSC 41 (11 July 2005)

The welfare of the child would be best served by allowing the pursuer supervised contact at a contact centre, rather than granting full parental rights or unsupervised contact, due to the child's unfamiliarity with the pursuer and previous difficulties with contact at the defender's address.

Citation: [2005] ScotSC 41
Parties: Pursuer: M S; Defender: M M
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 11 July 2005
Procedural Posture: Family Law Parental Rights and Contact / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome: Contact order granted in favour of the pursuer for supervised contact at a contact centre; application for parental rights and responsibilities refused at this stage.
Legal Topics: Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Child Contact Orders, Welfare of the Child

Family Law Child Law Parental Rights and Responsibilities Child Contact Orders Welfare 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

M S

Pursuer

M M

Defender

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

1 Whether the pursuer should be granted parental rights and responsibilities in respect of the child
2 Whether the pursuer should be granted contact with the child, and if so, under what conditions

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Contact order granted in favour of the pursuer for supervised contact at a contact centre; application for parental rights and responsibilities refused at this stage.

Orders

Refuses craves 1 and 2 (parental rights and responsibilities) in hoc statu
Grants crave 3 (contact) and allows supervised contact at a local authority contact centre, such as Kirkcaldy, at times and dates to be arranged