The court was asked as to the right of an unmarried father to take part in Children’s hearings under the 1995 Act, and depending on the answer whether the scheme was human rights compliant. K was father of the child, but the mother was unmarried. He applied to the Sheriff’s court for a parental responsibility order. He was not allowed to attend the initial hearings, not being deemed a ‘relevant person’.
Held: The words of section 93(2)(b)(c) should be read to include the additional words: ‘or who appears to have established family life with the child with which the decision of a children’s hearing may interfere’. The appellant was such a person, and the procedure adopted had been unfair in that it had not allowed him opportunity to answer the allegations made.
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson
[2010] UKSC 56, 2011 Fam LR 2, 2011 SLT 271, [2011] 1 WLR 18, UKSC 2010/0128
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summ, SC
Children (Scotland) Act 1995 93(2)(b)(c)
Scotland
Citing:
At Outer House – Principal Reporter, Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration, Re Suspension Ad Interim Of an Interlocutor SCS 30-Jun-2009
(Outer House) . .
Appeal from – The Principal Reporter v JPK and Another SCS 21-Jan-2010
. .
Cited by:
Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Children, Human Rights
Leading Case
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.427165
