D.C.C. v. D.G. [2012] ScotSC 15 (06 February 2012)

D.C.C. v. D.G. [2012] ScotSC 15 (06 February 2012)

The court found that the respondent was unable to satisfactorily discharge her parental responsibilities and that the child's residence with her would be seriously detrimental to the child's welfare. The statutory tests for a permanence order with authority to adopt were met. The respondent's consent was dispensed with as required by the child's welfare. The court ordered indirect and limited direct contact post-adoption, finding this to be in the child's best interests. Procedural unfairness in the adoption panel process did not materially affect the outcome or prejudice the respondent's rights before the court.

Citation
[2012] ScotSC 15
Parties
Pursuer: DCC; Defender: DG
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Petition for Permanence Order With Authority to Adopt / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Petition granted
Legal Topics
Permanence Orders, Adoption, Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Child Welfare, Contact Orders
Family Law Child Law Permanence Orders Adoption Parental Rights and Responsibilities Child Welfare Contact 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DCC

Pursuer

DG

Defender

Procedural Posture

Petition for Permanence Order With Authority to Adopt / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a permanence order with authority to adopt should be granted in respect of the child E
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's consent to adoption should be dispensed with
  3. 3 Whether post-adoption contact should be ordered and in what form

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent was unable to satisfactorily discharge her parental responsibilities and that the child's residence with her would be seriously detrimental to the child's welfare. The statutory tests for a permanence order with authority to adopt were met. The respondent's consent was dispensed with as required by the child's welfare. The court ordered indirect and limited direct contact post-adoption, finding this to be in the child's best interests. Procedural unfairness in the adoption panel process did not materially affect the outcome or prejudice the respondent's rights before the court.

Court Disposition

Petition granted

Orders

  • Permanence order with mandatory and ancillary provisions granted in favour of petitioners
  • Authority to adopt the child granted