JAMES ANDREW GREENHORN (AP) v. JOANNE BUSBY HAMILTON and GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL and MARGARET BUSBY (AP) [1999] ScotSC 2 (2nd March, 1999)

JAMES ANDREW GREENHORN (AP) v. JOANNE BUSBY HAMILTON and GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL and MARGARET BUSBY (AP) [1999] ScotSC 2 (2nd March, 1999)

The pursuer's amended second and third craves are incompetent because the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 does not permit the court to grant general declarators or specific issue orders in such general terms for the purpose of conferring 'relevant person' status. The statutory scheme requires a specific order with immediate practical effect on the child's welfare, and Parliament did not intend for unmarried fathers to acquire 'relevant person' status by general declarator alone.

Citation
[1999] ScotSC 2
Parties
Pursuer: James Andrew Greenhorn; Defender: Joanne Busby Hamilton; First Party Minuter: Glasgow City Council; Second Party Minuter: Margaret Busby
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Family Law (parental Rights and Responsibilities) / Judgment After Debate on Competency of Amended Craves
Outcome
Amended second and third craves dismissed as incompetent; remainder of action dismissed so far as founded thereon; no expenses due to or by any party.
Legal Topics
Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Children's Hearings, Declarator of Paternity, Specific Issue Orders, Contact Orders, Competency of Craves
Family Law Child Law Parental Rights and Responsibilities Children's Hearings Declarator of Paternity Specific Issue Orders Contact Orders Competency of Craves

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Andrew Greenhorn

Pursuer

Joanne Busby Hamilton

Defender

Glasgow City Council

First Party Minuter

Margaret Busby

Second Party Minuter

Procedural Posture

Family Law (parental Rights and Responsibilities) / Judgment After Debate on Competency of Amended Craves

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's amended second and third craves seeking declarators of entitlement to parental rights and responsibilities are competent under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether a 'specific issue order' can be granted in general terms to confer 'relevant person' status for children's hearings
  3. 3 Whether the court can grant general declarators of parental rights/responsibilities for the purpose of enabling attendance at children's hearings

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's amended second and third craves are incompetent because the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 does not permit the court to grant general declarators or specific issue orders in such general terms for the purpose of conferring 'relevant person' status. The statutory scheme requires a specific order with immediate practical effect on the child's welfare, and Parliament did not intend for unmarried fathers to acquire 'relevant person' status by general declarator alone.

Court Disposition

Amended second and third craves dismissed as incompetent; remainder of action dismissed so far as founded thereon; no expenses due to or by any party.

Orders

  • Sustains the fifth plea-in-law for the first party minuter and the first plea-in-law for the second party minuter to the extent of finding the pursuer's second and third craves to be incompetent.
  • Dismisses the said craves and the remainder of the action so far as founded thereon.