Westergaard v. Westergaard [1914] ScotLR 781 (17 July 1914)
The Scottish Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition for access because the custody and access arrangements were determined by a final and competent Danish decree, and there is no allegation of harm or change of circumstances affecting the child's welfare. The foreign decree is not contrary to Scottish public policy.
- Citation
- [1914] ScotLR 781
- Parties
- Petitioner: Elisabeth Margrethe Friis or Westergaard; Respondent: Reginald L. A. E. Westergaard
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 17 July 1914
- Procedural Posture
- Petition for Access to Child / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Divorce, Custody of Children, Access to Children, Recognition of Foreign Judgments
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Elisabeth Margrethe Friis or Westergaard
Petitioner
Reginald L. A. E. Westergaard
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Petition for Access to Child / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Scottish Court has jurisdiction to entertain a petition for access to a child where custody has been determined by a foreign (Danish) divorce decree.
- 2 Whether Scots law will refuse to enforce or recognise a foreign custody/access arrangement as contrary to public policy (contra bonos mores).
Ratio Decidendi
The Scottish Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition for access because the custody and access arrangements were determined by a final and competent Danish decree, and there is no allegation of harm or change of circumstances affecting the child's welfare. The foreign decree is not contrary to Scottish public policy.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- Petition for access refused and dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment