Appeal By Locality Reporter, Stirling Against Kr
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Sheriff N McFadyen,Sheriff Alasdair L. MacFadyen,Sheriff Principal D C W Pyle |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] SAC (Civ) 30 |
| Date | 19 November 2018 |
| Docket Number | STI-B39-18 |
| Court | Sheriff Appeal Court |
| Published date | 27 November 2018 |
SHERIFF APPEAL COURT
[2018] SAC (Civ) 30
STI-B39-18
Sheriff Principal Pyle
Appeal Sheriff A L MacFadyen
Appeal Sheriff N McFadyen
OPINION OF THE COURT
delivered by APPEAL SHERIFF A L MACFADYEN
in the appeal by
LOCALITY REPORTER, STIRLING
Appellant
against
KR
Respondent
in the Children’s Referral for the case of the child S (17 December 2013)
Appellant: J Guy; Anderson Strathern
Respondent: J Aitken, advocate; Hill & Robb
Safeguarder: J Savage; Russel + Aitken
19 November 2018
Introduction
[1] This is an appeal by stated case from a decision of the summary sheriff after proof in
respect of a disputed statement of grounds of referral to a children’s hearing.
[2] The appeal raises two issues: first, as a matter of principle, the circumstances in
which parties, in this case the Reporter and the safeguarder, can appeal a sheriff’s decision
2
not to find as established one of the supporting facts to a ground of referral; secondly, on the
facts whether the summary sheriff was entitled not to find the facts as established.
Background Circumstances
[3] In the original statement of grounds the Reporter set out three grounds.
[4] Ground 1 was that in terms of section 67(2)(a) of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland)
Act 2011 (“the 2011 Act”) the child S, who is now four years of age, was likely to suffer
unnecessarily or her health or development was likely to be seriously impaired, due to lack
of parental care. In support of that ground the Reporter stated that S’s mother, KR, and S’s
father, RL, were unwilling or unable to provide consistent social, emotional and physical
care of S which had had a detrimental impact upon her. Examples were given of lack of
safety or hygiene in the family home, a failure to provide S with consistent routines,
boundaries, appropriate stimulation or appropriate supervision and a lack of appropriate
food in the family home. Before the summary sheriff, the parents intimated that this ground
was not opposed, which allowed him to find it to be established.
[5] We shall return to Ground 2. Ground 3 was that in terms of section 67(2)(c) of the
2011 Act S had, or was likely to have had, a close connection with a person who had
committed a schedule 1 offence. In support of that ground the Reporter stated that in
January 2005 KR had assaulted her daughter, C, then aged three, by pulling her forcibly
along the ground by her arm. This, said the Reporter, demonstrated an offence against C in
that KR had wilfully ill-treated her in a manner likely to cause her unnecessary suffering or
injury to health, being an offence mentioned in schedule 1(2) of the Criminal Procedure
(Scotland) Act 1995 (“the 1995 Act”), namely section 12 of the Children and Young Persons
To continue reading
Request your trial