PROCEEDINGS TO DETERMINA WHETHER CM AND GL, SOCIAL WORKERS, CHILDRENS AND FAMILIES DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL ARE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT [2013] ScotSC 100 (17 December 2013)

PROCEEDINGS TO DETERMINA WHETHER CM AND GL, SOCIAL WORKERS, CHILDRENS AND FAMILIES DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL ARE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT [2013] ScotSC 100 (17 December 2013)

CM and GL, as responsible social workers, failed to comply with the court's interlocutors by not making the children available for contact with their mother, AT, from 11 July 2013 until 22 August 2013. Their conduct was deliberate and intentional, not accidental or inadvertent, and implied lack of respect for the authority of the court. The court's order, though not peremptory in statutory terms, was enforceable at common law. Accordingly, CM and GL are guilty of contempt of court.

Citation
[2013] ScotSC 100
Parties
Alleged Contemnor: CM; Alleged Contemnor: GL; Applicant/mother: AT; Interested Party: City of Edinburgh Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Contempt Proceedings / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
CM and GL found guilty of contempt of court; no penalty imposed.
Legal Topics
Supervision Requirements, Contact Orders, Children (scotland) Act 1995, Professional Duties of Social Workers, Court Orders Enforcement
Family Law Child Protection Contempt of Court Supervision Requirements Contact Orders Children (scotland) Act 1995 Professional Duties of Social Workers Court Orders Enforcement

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CM

Alleged Contemnor

GL

Alleged Contemnor

AT

Applicant/mother

City of Edinburgh Council

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CM and GL, social workers, were in contempt of court for failing to facilitate contact between children and their mother as ordered by the court
  2. 2 Whether the court's interlocutor constituted a peremptory order enforceable by contempt proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of CM and GL was wilful and demonstrated lack of respect for the court

Ratio Decidendi

CM and GL, as responsible social workers, failed to comply with the court's interlocutors by not making the children available for contact with their mother, AT, from 11 July 2013 until 22 August 2013. Their conduct was deliberate and intentional, not accidental or inadvertent, and implied lack of respect for the authority of the court. The court's order, though not peremptory in statutory terms, was enforceable at common law. Accordingly, CM and GL are guilty of contempt of court.

Court Disposition

CM and GL found guilty of contempt of court; no penalty imposed.

Orders

  • CM and GL jointly liable in the expenses of the proceedings for contempt of court in so far as not dealt with.
  • Allows an account to be lodged and when lodged remits same to the Auditor of Court to tax and to report.