GMD v. YMSC [2004] ScotSC 100 (02 December 2004)

GMD v. YMSC [2004] ScotSC 100 (02 December 2004)

The welfare of the child would not be best served by a Residence Order in favour of the Pursuer, but it is in the child's best interests for the Pursuer to have substantial contact, including residential contact, and for the child's surname to revert to that on her birth certificate. The Defender's exclusionary attitude towards the Pursuer is contrary to the child's welfare, but the child's settled circumstances and attachment to the Defender outweigh the Pursuer's case for residence.

Citation
[2004] ScotSC 100
Parties
Pursuer: G M D; Defender: Y M S C or D
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Residence and Contact / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Residence Order refused; Contact Order and Specific Issue Order granted
Legal Topics
Residence Order, Contact Order, Specific Issue Order, Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Child's Welfare, Change of Child's Surname
Family Law Child Law Residence Order Contact Order Specific Issue Order Parental Rights and Responsibilities Child's Welfare Change of Child's Surname

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G M D

Pursuer

Y M S C or D

Defender

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Residence and Contact / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Residence Order should be granted in favour of the Pursuer
  2. 2 Whether a Contact Order should be granted in favour of the Pursuer
  3. 3 Whether a Specific Issue Order should be made regarding the child's surname

Ratio Decidendi

The welfare of the child would not be best served by a Residence Order in favour of the Pursuer, but it is in the child's best interests for the Pursuer to have substantial contact, including residential contact, and for the child's surname to revert to that on her birth certificate. The Defender's exclusionary attitude towards the Pursuer is contrary to the child's welfare, but the child's settled circumstances and attachment to the Defender outweigh the Pursuer's case for residence.

Court Disposition

Residence Order refused; Contact Order and Specific Issue Order granted

Orders

  • Refuses the Pursuer's first crave for a Residence Order
  • Grants the Pursuer's second crave for contact, including residential contact, as specified: each alternate weekend from Saturday 10.00am to Sunday 5.00pm; two weeks during summer holidays (in 2005 as two separate weeks, from 2006 as a block); one week during Easter holidays; one week during October holidays; each...