LG AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2015] ScotSC 68 (30 October 2015)

LG AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2015] ScotSC 68 (30 October 2015)

The pursuer’s convictions for dishonesty, while relevant, do not render her unsuitable to work with children in the roles she seeks (kinship carer, child counsellor), as she poses no risk of physical harm and limited risk of financial harm in those contexts. The interference with her rights under Article 8 ECHR is disproportionate. She is suitable to work with children and should be removed from the children’s list.

Citation
[2015] ScotSC 68
Parties
Pursuer: L. G.; Defenders: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Summary Application / Appeal Against Inclusion in Children’s List
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Protection of Vulnerable Groups (scotland) Act 2007, Children’s List, Kinship Care, Suitability to Work With Children, Criminal Convictions and Employment, Human Rights (echr Article 8)
Child Protection Public Law Protection of Vulnerable Groups (scotland) Act 2007 Children’s List Kinship Care Suitability to Work With Children Criminal Convictions and Employment Human Rights (echr Article 8)

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L. G.

Pursuer

The Scottish Ministers

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Summary Application / Appeal Against Inclusion in Children’s List

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer is unsuitable to work with children for the purposes of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007
  2. 2 Whether inclusion in the children’s list is a proportionate interference with the pursuer’s rights under Article 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer’s convictions for dishonesty, while relevant, do not render her unsuitable to work with children in the roles she seeks (kinship carer, child counsellor), as she poses no risk of physical harm and limited risk of financial harm in those contexts. The interference with her rights under Article 8 ECHR is disproportionate. She is suitable to work with children and should be removed from the children’s list.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Direct the defenders to remove the pursuer from the children’s list under section 1 of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007
  • Find the defenders liable to the pursuer in expenses as taxed