MT v DJ [2000] ScotCS 190 (10 July 2000)

MT v DJ [2000] ScotCS 190 (10 July 2000)

The proper interpretation of Section 2(1)(b) of the Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988 is uncertain and causes significant practical difficulties; the issue is of general importance and requires reconsideration by a larger court.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 190
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: M. T.; Defender and Respondent: D. T.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Remit to Larger Court
Outcome
remitted to a larger court for reconsideration
Legal Topics
Child Witness Competency, Hearsay Evidence Admissibility, Parental Rights and Responsibilities
Family Law Civil Evidence Child Witness Competency Hearsay Evidence Admissibility Parental Rights and Responsibilities

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. T.

Pursuer and Appellant

D. T.

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Remit to Larger Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the competency of a child witness should be assessed at the time of the statement or at the time of proof
  2. 2 Interpretation of Section 2(1)(b) of the Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988 regarding admissibility of hearsay evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The proper interpretation of Section 2(1)(b) of the Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988 is uncertain and causes significant practical difficulties; the issue is of general importance and requires reconsideration by a larger court.

Court Disposition

remitted to a larger court for reconsideration

Orders

  • The matter of Section 2(1)(b) interpretation is remitted to a larger court for reconsideration.