Grounds for Divorce
In Scotland, there are two grounds for divorce. The pursuer (applicant) either requires to establish that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, or parties can apply for divorce where one party has been issued with an interim Gender Recognition Certificate. Irretrievable breakdown can be established by any one of the following:
The same grounds apply for divorce of same-sex couples. However, adultery is not a means by which to establish irretrievable breakdown as it is for heterosexual couples.
In Scotland, termination of a civil partnership is known as a dissolution and the grounds for dissolution are the same as the grounds for divorce, however, as with same-sex couples, adultery is not a means by which to demonstrate irretrievable breakdown for dissolution due to its definition.
Process and Timeline for Divorce
While parties are not required to attend court where a divorce is uncontested, in Scotland parties do have to commence court proceedings to obtain a divorce.
Where no financial orders are sought, and if there are no children under the age of 16, parties can apply for divorce using the “simplified divorce procedure”. The applicant is required to complete a form, and if divorce is sought on the basis of one year’s separation, their spouse requires to signify their consent. The form is then submitted to the court and divorce tends to be granted within a few months.
Where spouses do not meet the criteria for the simplified divorce procedure, or where there remains dispute over financial or child-related matters, full divorce proceedings require to be raised. Legal pleadings are prepared, and issued by the pursuer specifying the orders sought. Once served, the defender has strict time limits within which to defend the action, and lodge their pleadings setting out the basis of opposition. If the action is undefended, the pursuer can ask the court to grant divorce by submitting a “minute” and other supporting documentation to include affidavits, following which the court should grant the divorce within a few months.
Where defences are lodged, and the divorce proceeds as contested, the court will ultimately fix a full evidential hearing, known as a proof, to consider the matters in dispute. In terms of the likely timeline for a contested action, much will depend on the availability of the relevant court and the nature of the issues in dispute; however, this will generally take between one and two years to conclude.
Rules for Service of Divorce Proceedings
Sheriff Court
The Initial Writ (the initiating document which sets out the detail of the claim in ordinary civil actions in the Sheriff Court) is sent to the relevant Sheriff Court for warranting. Upon review of the papers, a sheriff shall issue a warrant which is the court’s authority to serve the proceedings on the defender.
Once the Initial Writ is warranted, the documentation can then be served either by post, using first class recorded delivery, or personally on the defender by a Sheriff Officer (process servers). The Sheriff Officer shall serve the documentation personally on the defender or can leave the Initial Writ in the hands of a resident at the person’s dwelling place or with an employee at their place of business. Where a Sheriff Officer is unsuccessful in executing service, they may, after making diligent enquiries, serve the documentation by depositing at the person’s dwelling place or place of business, or leave it at the dwelling or place of business in such a way that it will be brought to the defender’s attention. Alternatively, the defender’s solicitor can accept service on the defender’s behalf with their authority.
Court of Session
The Summons (the initiating document which sets out the detail of the claim in ordinary civil actions in the Court of Session) is sent to the Court of Session for signetting. A judge shall review the papers and return the signetted summons, which is the court’s authority to serve the proceedings on the defender.
Once the Summons is signetted, the documents can then be served either by post to the known dwelling place of the defender, or personally by Messengers at Arms (process servers). The Messengers at Arms shall serve the documentation personally on the defender or can leave the documentation in the hands of another person at the person’s dwelling place or, failing which by leaving it in their dwelling place if after enquiring they have reasonable grounds to believe the defender resides there. The Messenger at Arms can also deposit it with someone at, or at, the defender’s place of business if they have reasonable grounds to believe the defender carries on business there. Alternatively, the defender’s solicitor can accept service on the defender’s behalf with their authority.
Religious Marriages and Divorces
The Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 regulates marriage in Scotland. Religious marriages are treated similarly to civil marriages in respect that the following steps are required to ensure the marriage is solemnised.
The above formalities require to be complied with in order for the marriage to exist.
The means by which to obtain a divorce in Scotland are the same irrespective of whether parties are married in a civil or religious or belief ceremony.
Processes in Relation to Ending a Marriage
In Scotland, nullity proceedings can be brought, in which case the marriage may be found to be void or voidable. A void marriage is one which was not legally valid because the parties were closely related, one or both parties were under the age of 18 (or under the age of 16 if the marriage took place prior to 27 February 2023) or if either party was already married or in a civil partnership. If the marriage was not legally valid, it is treated as never having existed.
Alternatively, it is possible to annul a marriage for various reasons, such as where a party has not consented to the marriage, or was incurably impotent. In such circumstances, the marriage legally exists until it is successfully annulled, and such parties acquire the same rights to financial provision as they would have had had they divorced.
Parties can be judicially separated in Scotland and the same grounds apply as for divorce. The parties can live apart albeit remain married, and all responsibilities and rights arising from the marriage shall continue.
Jurisdictional Grounds to Commence Divorce Proceedings
A Scottish court has jurisdiction if either party to the marriage is domiciled in Scotland or if either has been habitually resident in Scotland throughout the year immediately before the divorce action is raised. If proceedings are raised in a Sheriff Court, parties must additionally demonstrate that one of the parties has either been resident in the relevant Sheriffdom for a period at least 40 days prior to the proceedings being raised, or was resident in the Sheriffdom for a period of at least 40 days that ended not more than 40 days prior to the proceedings being raised, and has no known residence in Scotland on that date.
Jurisdiction for divorce is regulated by the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973.
Same-Sex Spouses and/or Civil Partners
The same rules apply to same-sex spouses and civil partners, however, notwithstanding the additional criterion for a Sheriff Court to have jurisdiction (as outlined above), Edinburgh Sheriff Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain proceedings for the divorce of parties in a same-sex marriage if the parties married each other in Scotland, where no court has, or is recognised as having, jurisdiction, and it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to assume jurisdiction in the case (a “jurisdiction of last resort”).
Concepts of Domicile, Residence and Nationality
The concepts of domicile and nationality are relevant to determining jurisdiction for divorce in Scotland. While not defined in the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973, the concepts are to be given their ordinary meaning.
Domicile is a common law concept used by the courts to determine which legal system applies to an individual at a specific time. It can be considered as an individual’s permanent home, or where they have the closest connection.
Residence is where an individual lives.
Contesting Jurisdiction
A party to divorce proceedings can contest jurisdiction, and priority is given to the jurisdiction within the British Isles in which the parties to the marriage or civil partnership last resided together. Provided that one of the parties to the marriage was habitually resident in the relevant jurisdiction throughout the year prior to when the couple ceased to reside together, proceedings raised elsewhere in the British Isles must be sisted (halted) regardless of where proceedings were first raised.
Otherwise, a party can seek to sist (halt) proceedings in Scotland if they can demonstrate that proceedings are already ongoing before another court of competent jurisdiction, and that that court is a more appropriate forum for the case to be heard in all of the circumstances of the case. This is known as a discretionary sist and consideration shall be given to the general forum non conveniens factors, to include where the parties’ assets are located, where they are now living, and how far proceedings have progressed, amongst other considerations.
Stay of Proceedings Relating to Foreign Jurisdiction
See above within this section.
Grounds for Jurisdiction for Commencing Financial Proceedings
Jurisdiction for divorce is regulated by the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973. The Scottish courts have jurisdiction if either of the parties has been habitually resident in Scotland throughout the year before the action is raised, or is domiciled in Scotland.
Contesting Jurisdiction
A party to financial proceedings can contest jurisdiction.
Stay of Proceedings
Within the British Isles – eg, England or Jersey – the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 affords priority to the jurisdiction where the parties last resided together. Where at least one party was habitually resident in that jurisdiction for the year before the parties last lived together, if proceedings are raised in that jurisdiction, proceedings raised in any other part of the British Isles must be sisted (stayed), regardless of where proceedings were first raised.
In other cases, the Scottish courts have discretion to sist based on the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens. The party seeking the sist must show that there are proceedings ongoing in another competent jurisdiction, and that it would be in the interests of justice for the case to be heard there.
Financial Claims After a Foreign Divorce
A foreign divorce will generally be recognised in Scotland if it was obtained by means of proceedings and one of the parties was a national of, habitually resident in, or domiciled in the country in which the divorce was obtained, and the divorce is effective in that country.
Where an overseas divorce is obtained otherwise than by means of proceedings – eg, without the involvement of a court, it will be recognised only if both parties are domiciled in the country in which the divorce was obtained. If either party was habitually resident in the UK throughout the year before such a divorce was obtained, it will not be recognised.
Recognition of foreign divorces can be refused if one party was not given sufficient notice or was denied an opportunity to take part in the proceedings, or otherwise on public policy grounds.
There are no procedural requirements, although parties may seek a declarator of recognition of a foreign divorce if there is doubt as to the recognition of the relevant foreign divorce in Scotland.
There are limited grounds under which an application can be made for financial provision following a foreign divorce, with the jurisdictional test requiring a connection of the parties to Scotland – eg, habitual residence or domicile. Essentially, the court will apply Scots law and seek to place the parties in the financial position that they would have been in had the divorce proceeded in Scotland.
Service requirements in financial proceedings are the same as for divorce proceedings, as is the process and timeline for financial proceedings.
Court’s Approach
The parties are subject to the provisions of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 1985 (the “1985 Act”), which includes a defined concept of matrimonial property providing for fair sharing on divorce – ie, it has no propriety consequences during the marriage. Parties may enter into a nuptial agreement to modify the effect of the 1985 Act.
The 1985 Act provides a framework for financial provision on divorce. The overriding principle is to ensure fair sharing of the matrimonial property, which is broadly defined as the net value of all assets acquired by the parties during the marriage, which are still held at the date of separation, except assets acquired by way of gift or inheritance from a third party.
The fair sharing principle applies unless there are circumstances justifying a different outcome, such as where the source of the funds used to acquire a matrimonial asset did not derive from the income or efforts of the parties during the marriage.
Fair account should be taken of any economic advantage derived by one party from contributions of the other, and of any economic disadvantage suffered by either party in the interests of the other party or the family. The economic burden of caring for children under the age of 16 should be shared fairly between the parties.
Where one party has been substantially dependent on the financial support of the other, they should be awarded such provision as is reasonable to enable them to adjust to the loss of support over a period not exceeding three years. A party who is likely to suffer serious financial hardship as a result of the divorce should be awarded such provision as is reasonable to relieve them of hardship over a reasonable period.
Regulate or Reallocation of Assets or Resources on Divorce
The main financial orders courts will make are:
When making such orders, courts will consider the factors set out in the paragraph above.
Identification of Assets
There is a duty of full disclosure on the parties, and the court can enforce disclosure in the event of non-compliance by a variety of means, including against third parties
Property Regimes
Property regimes do exist in Scotland. See the discussion above.
Trusts
The courts in Scotland recognise trusts. Property held in trust is owned by the trustees and will generally be excluded from the value of the matrimonial property where one party is the settlor or beneficiary. Arguments can nonetheless be advanced that an interest in a trust is matrimonial property and/or is available as a resource. Transfers into trust can be set aside where they have been made for the purpose of defeating the other party’s claim. There is no concept of the constructive or resulting trust in Scots law as is known in some common law countries.
There is a strong emphasis on achieving a financial clean break. Awards of periodical allowance (post divorce support) are the exception rather than the norm, and they will only be awarded if a capital sum or property transfer would be inappropriate or insufficient. In all but the most extreme circumstances, orders for periodical allowance are limited to a maximum period of three years from divorce.
Spouses owe an obligation of maintenance (known as aliment) to each other whilst they are married. The amount is determined by reference to the needs and resources of each party. The obligation subsists only until divorce is granted.
Interim Maintenance
Following the breakdown of a marriage a party can apply for interim maintenance pending the final outcome.
Ongoing Maintenance
See the paragraphs above regarding ongoing maintenance.
Marital (nuptial) agreements have long been considered to be enforceable in Scotland. A court will only interfere with a validly executed agreement if, at the time the agreement was entered into, the circumstances were such that it was not fair and reasonable. There is neither need for specific provision to be made for either spouse, nor for the terms of the agreement to bear any reference to the orders a court would usually make upon separation.
The opportunity to take legal advice, the extent of disclosure, and the time afforded to the parties to consider the implications of the agreement are all factors in determining the enforceability of nuptial agreements. The position should be the same in the case of a foreign nuptial agreement being relied on in a Scottish court.
Key Case Law
Key case law includes:
C v M 2021 S.L.T (Sh Ct) 319;
Bradley v Bradley 2018 S.C. (S.A.C.) 7; and
Gillon v Gillon (no3) 1995 SLT 678.
Division of Assets for Unmarried Couples
The Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 (the “2006 Act”) gives rights to unmarried couples to bring claims against each other within one year of separation. Compensatory payments can be sought from a former partner for contributions made during the relationship, whether financial or otherwise. The applicant must show that they have suffered economic disadvantage in the interests of the other party or of a child of the relationship, or that the other party has derived economic advantage from contributions made by the applicant.
The court may award a capital sum, which may be payable in instalments, or such interim order as it sees fit. Many orders available on divorce are not available to former cohabitants, for example, property transfer orders or pension shares.
Acquisition of Rights
Cohabitants do not per se acquire any rights by virtue of length of cohabitation, children etc, but these would be factors relevant to decision.
Enforcement of Compliance
A registered Minute of Agreement between the parties is directly enforceable and has the same status as a court order. All means of diligence are available – for example, arrestment and inhibition, and ultimately sequestration (bankruptcy).
International Enforcement
International enforcement of a financial order is permitted in Scotland.
Media and Press Reporting
Scottish courts have a long tradition of open justice and, other than in specific and limited circumstances, the media will be allowed to attend and report on court proceedings.
In general terms, where legal proceedings in Scotland are heard in public, they are capable of being reported, provided such publication is contemporaneous and in good faith, failing which they are liable to be treated as being in contempt of court (Contempt of Court Act 1981). The court may, however, determine that it would be appropriate to postpone or restrict such publication, and there are specific statutory exclusions relating to family law and child cases.
Undefended and simplified divorce actions do not call in open court. The consequence is that such cases cannot be reported until decree of divorce has been granted, at which time the media would have access to the names of the parties and the date on which they were divorced.
The Judicial Proceedings (Regulation of Reports) Act 1926 provides that, in the case of actions of divorce or dissolution, the media may only publish:
Where proceedings involve a child aged 16 or under, the court may, in terms of Section 46 of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937, make an order that the child or children must not be capable of being identified by any newspaper report. This would normally mean that any subsequent judgment will be anonymised.
No such order is required in respect of a child concerned in exclusion order proceedings by virtue of Section 44 of the Children Scotland Act 1995, and likewise Section 182 of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 makes provision for a child involved in a children’s hearing or other proceedings under the Act – in both cases, the relevant sections simply provide that any publication that could identify such a child is prohibited.
Similarly, adoption and permanence proceedings are heard and determined in private in accordance with Section 109 of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007, unless the court decides otherwise. Again, where a judgment is produced, this will ordinarily be anonymised so that the parties, and the child(ren), cannot be identified.
Unless specifically excluded by statute, members of the media may be permitted to attend proceedings that are closed to the public (Sloan v B 1991 SC 412). They may utilise live text-based communications whilst within a courtroom, but they are nevertheless expected to adhere to the reporting restrictions noted above. Photography is not permitted within court buildings without prior judicial approval, and similarly electronic devices may not be used with the exception of solicitors who may use them for the purposes of proceedings only.
Where the relevant reporting restrictions do not automatically apply by operation of statute (as set out above), parties may prevail upon the court’s general discretion in terms of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, Section 11 of which empowers the court to prohibit publication of a name or a matter in connection with the proceedings. Any such order must, however, be sent to any interested person, which will include the press, and must be published on the Scottish Courts & Tribunals website. This may have the unintended consequence of drawing their attention to an action that might have otherwise proceeded unnoticed.
Where a judge exercises their discretion to impose reporting restrictions, they must first make an interim order which specifies why they are making the order. They must thereafter allow any interested person the opportunity to make representations before making a final determination on the matter. Once an order has been made, it remains open to any person aggrieved by such an order to apply for its revocation or variation.
There is also scope for the relaxation of reporting restrictions in relation to children’s hearings and other proceedings under the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 where to do so would be in the interests of justice.
Anonymising Proceedings
See the discussion in the paragraphs above.
Mechanisms Outside of the Court Process
There is a strong and established culture of extrajudicial negotiations being used to achieve settlement between parties, with the court action then being limited to that of a change of status alone, with all financial matters dealt with contractually in advance.
Mediation, arbitration and collaborative law are all available.
Mandated ADR Methods
There is scope for the court to order parties to attend mediation – it is rarely used, less so successfully, and no penalty for non-compliance.
Status of Agreement Reached via Non-Court Process
Such agreements have the force and effect of court orders and can be enforced as such.
Jurisdictional Grounds
In actions relating to children (including parental responsibility, residence and contact actions), jurisdiction is established through the child’s habitual residence in Scotland, or in the case of an emergency, through their presence in Scotland. If an action is raised in the Sheriff Court as opposed to the Court of Session, then the child must be habitually resident within the geographical boundary of the Sheriffdom.
Domicile, Residence and Nationality
As above, jurisdiction in actions relating only to children is primarily based on the habitual residence of the child.
Should issues of parental responsibility arise in the context of other legal proceedings such as a divorce, the court seized for the divorce is also able to make orders in relation to children and their care even though they are not resident in Scotland.
In cases where a litigation has concluded and final orders granted in relation to parental responsibility, should a party seek to revisit or vary the orders granted, they must do so with an application to the court which granted the final orders.
Application to Court
Either parent can apply to the court for a residence order, regulating the arrangements for where and with whom a child should live, or a contact order, regulating the arrangements for maintaining personal relations and direct contact with a child.
Before the court will grant an order, the sheriff or judge needs to be satisfied that, firstly, the proposed order is in the best interests of the child and secondly, that it would be better for the order to be made than no order at all. Beyond that, the sheriff or judge must take into consideration the views of any child, provided that the child is capable of expressing a view.
Legal Approach to Custody and Parental Responsibility
In Scotland, mothers have automatic parental rights and responsibilities (PRRs) regardless of their marital status, and if the father was married to the mother at the time of the child’s birth, he too has automatic PRRs. Unmarried fathers obtain PRRs if they are registered as the father on the child’s birth certificate or obtain an order via the Court.
Under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, parental responsibilities include the responsibility to safeguard and promote their child’s health, development and welfare, and to provide guidance and direction. A parent is also responsible for maintaining contact with their child. Parental rights mirror the responsibilities, and their function is to enable parents to fulfil their parental responsibilities. A child is defined as a person under the age of 18, but most PRR’s only apply to a child who is under the age of 16, except the responsibility to provide guidance. Most court orders cease to apply when a child turns 16.
In Scotland, there is no concept of custody and access, but rather residence and contact. There are no presumptions in relation to an equal division of time between separated parents but the generally held view in Scotland is that a child should enjoy a meaningful relationship with both parents. Accordingly, it is common for a child to reside with one parent and have contact with the other.
A parent may not remove a child from the UK without the consent of the other parent or a court order allowing the child to be removed.
Restrictions on the Court
The court can make any order as it sees fit, including residence, contact, and orders granting or restricting PRRs so long as the order is in the best interests of the child, and it would be better for the child to make the order than make no order. Specific Issue orders can regulate aspects of a child’s life including schooling and medical treatment.
Child Maintenance
Child maintenance is a sum of money paid to the parent with whom the child resides (whether by agreement or by court order) by the other parent regardless of whether the parents are married.
Child maintenance can be agreed via a private arrangement between parents or, where all parties reside within the UK, administered through the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), which is a government scheme. If parents use the CMS to calculate an appropriate amount of maintenance, then a statutory formula is applied. This is calculated as a percentage of the “non-resident” parent’s (the parent with whom the child lives less frequently) gross weekly income, less any pension contributions. An adjustment is made to take account of the number of nights that the child lives with the non-resident parent each week. When childcare is shared exactly equally between parents, no child maintenance is payable.
In Scotland, the CMS has exclusive jurisdiction for assessing and enforcing payment of child maintenance where both parents and the child live in the UK, and the child is under the age of 16 or 19 if they remain in full-time, non-advanced education. If parties cannot agree an appropriate amount of child maintenance, then, in most situations, the only remedy is to apply to the CMS for an assessment. The CMS has wide-ranging powers to investigate the non-resident parent’s income.
Parents have the ability to agree an amount of child maintenance between them and for that amount to be recorded in a contract to be enforced as required. After one year from signing such a contract, either party can apply to the CMS for an assessment which would override the amount agreed in the contract.
Where all parties are in the UK, the CMS has exclusive jurisdiction to determine child maintenance. There are, however, limited situations where a court can make an order and these are:
When making any of the above orders, the court will consider the needs of the resident parent, the resources of the non-resident parent, and generally all circumstances of the case.
Children can make a claim against their parents if they have reached sufficient age and maturity, which is deemed to be 12. Young adults up to the age of 25 may make a claim against their parents provided they are undergoing trading or education. The courts will make an award based on needs, resources, and all circumstances of the case.
Courts’ Power in Case of Disagreement
In circumstances where parents disagree about a particular issue in relation to the upbringing of their child, either parent can apply to the court for a specific issue order under Section 11(2) of the Children’s (Scotland) Act 1995 to determine the matter in dispute. For example, if parents disagree about what school a child should attend, the court has the power to make an order in respect of the child’s schooling. As with all child-related matters which come before the court, the welfare of the child is paramount consideration for the sheriff or judge.
Parental Alienation
Parental alienation is not a term which is defined in Scottish family law, but practitioners are increasingly seeing the issue raised in high-conflict parenting disputes. It is commonly used to describe a situation where a child rejects their parent, often displaying extreme negativity towards them, and is allegedly the result of psychological manipulation by the other parent. Often the child or the aligned parent will offer a variety of reasons to justify the child not wanting to have contact with their other parent, such as domestic abuse concerns.
When making an order in respect of a child, the sheriff or judge’s paramount consideration is the welfare of the child. In addition, the sheriff or judge must consider a range of factors, known as the welfare checklist, before making an order. The factors include ascertaining the wishes and feelings of the child concerned as well as the need to protect the child from abuse.
The decision about whether or not a child has been alienated is a question of fact for the sheriff or judge to determine at a proof. Often in cases where parental alienation is alleged, the sheriff or judge will appoint an independent expert, such as a child psychologist, to investigate and report to the court the underlying issue for the child and for the parents, and possibly make recommendations for contact. Whilst an independent expert’s report is not determinative, it is often of assistance to the sheriff or judge to understand the reasons for the child’s rejection and reach a decision on what is in the best interests of the child.
Children’s Evidence
Children can give evidence in court, although it is uncommon in family law cases as they should be shielded from their parents’ dispute so far as possible. If a child is called as a witness and they are under the age of 16, they would be classed as a vulnerable witness and special measures can be used to help the child give evidence. This includes taking of evidence remotely or by a live link, use of a screen, or assistance from a supporter in court.
Mechanisms Outside the Court Process
ADR refers to several different methods used to resolve disputes other than applying to court. The following are the most commonly used types.
Mediation
This is a popular method used by many separated parties to resolve both the financial aspects and childcare disputes arising from their separation. It is a voluntary process whereby an independent third-party mediator channels a discussion between the parties which can be extremely helpful to assist them to understand the other’s perspectives. If parties reach agreement at mediation, they would be encouraged to instruct their own solicitors to prepare a Minute of Agreement on their behalf reflecting the terms agreed.
Arbitration
This is a voluntary process where both parties have legal representation, but they appoint a private judge, known as an arbitrator, who is a specialist-trained family lawyer, to adjudicate upon their case. Both parties will put their arguments to the arbitrator who will make a decision that is legally binding on both parties.
Collaborative law
This is a process whereby both parties appoint a solicitor who is collaboratively trained. The parties and their respective solicitors have a series of non-adversarial, round-table meetings to discuss settlement. At the outset of the case, all parties contract to resolve all issues without resorting to court to ensure all are fully engaged with the process.
ADR Methods Mandated by Court
Parties cannot be compelled to engage in ADR prior to raising a court action. However, in court actions involving a child, a sheriff or judge may, at any stage, refer the action to mediation, but compliance is not compulsory.
Status of Agreement Reached via a Non-court Process
If agreement is reached at mediation or using the collaborative process, the parties will be encouraged to instruct their solicitor to embody the terms of settlement into a Minute of Agreement, which is a legally binding contact and which, once registered, has the effect of a court order. In arbitration, any decision of the arbitrator is legally binding on the parties.
Requirements Imposed by Statute
ADR is a voluntary process in Scotland and parties cannot be compelled to engage in it.
Media and Press Reporting
The principle of open justice is enshrined in Scots law and other than in specific and limited circumstances, the media will be allowed to attend and report on cases. That said, the general principle can be departed from where an order restricting reporting is made which is particularly common in child law cases.
Where proceedings involve a child, it is open to solicitors to move the court in terms of Section 46(1) of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937 to make an order that the child or children must not be capable of being identified in newspaper reports.
No such order is required in respect of a child concerned in exclusion order proceedings by virtue of Section 44 of the Children Scotland Act 1995, and likewise Section 182 of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 makes provision for a child involved in a children’s hearing or other proceedings under the Act – in both cases, the relevant sections simply provide that any publication that could identify such a child is prohibited.
Similarly, adoption and permanence proceedings are heard and determined in private in accordance with Section 109 of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007, unless the court decides otherwise.
Where the relevant reporting restrictions do not automatically apply by operation of statute (as set out above), parties may prevail upon the court’s general discretion in terms of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, Section 11 of which empowers the court to prohibit publication of a name or a matter in connection with the proceedings. Any such order must, however, be sent to any interested person, which will include the press, and must be published on the Scottish Courts & Tribunals website. This may have the unintended consequence of drawing their attention to an action that might have otherwise proceeded unnoticed.
Anonymising the Child
Prior to the publication of a judicial opinion, there exists the opportunity for a sheriff or judge to anonymise an opinion (for example using initials instead of a person’s name). That commonly happens in family law judgments, particularly in cases involving a child.
The effect of such a step is not the same as an order restricting reporting: the media will still be able to report the proceedings (unless the media is prohibited because an order in terms of Section 46(1) of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937 has been granted) but it does allow for other personal information to be excluded from the opinion where it is not, in the eyes of the judicial office holder, relevant to the decision or necessary for the purposes of pronouncing judgment.
Princes Exchange
1 Earl Grey Street
Edinburgh
EH3 9EE
Scotland
+44 131 228 8111
www.turcanconnell.comAt the time of writing this article I have relatively recently returned from the annual Scottish Family Law Association Conference in St Andrews, attended by over 200 delegates, and over the course of a weekend we listened to various informative talks concerning aspects of Scots family law as you would expect, but a substantial proportion of the agenda was dedicated to the impact, mentally and physically of trauma. As family lawyers we routinely advise and guide people experiencing the most stressful and distressing times in their lives, whether that is as a result of separation, escaping an abusive relationship, or the rollercoaster of a fertility journey. We have done so without question, but listening to the relatively new research on financial abuse, and the insidious effect of mental abuse in all of its forms both during, and frequently for years after a relationship has broken down, highlights the importance for family lawyers to not only be aware of the tenor of their advice and how it is shared, but also how to apply this knowledge to guiding our clients through the legal process. A cost-of-living crisis has rendered access to much needed supports and legal advice out of reach for many, and for others has given cause to be far more discerning in the choices they make. So what issues are we seeing in our day-to-day practices?
Wellbeing/Mental Health/Trauma Informed/Curators
Coercive control as a pattern of deliberate abuse has been a crime in Scotland since 2019. Victim survivors are, over a sustained period, worn down, intimidated, and isolated with the abuse taking place behind closed doors and often with the children roped in as a means of unwittingly informing against the victim. They won’t be able to predict what triggers their abuser, who will know they don’t have to use physical abuse to exert control. A separate and emerging branch of coercive control is financial abuse both during and post separation, with systems such as banking and court processes upon which victims should be able to rely used and manipulated by the perpetrator. Loans taken in their names often without their knowledge until separation when they are left with significant debt. Monies removed from their accounts using biometrics against them to access bank accounts. Recognising this as abuse suffered by a client, advising them accordingly, and identifying strategies to address the abuse is increasingly an aspect of separation cases. A recent appeal decision in the inner house has ably demonstrated this particular issue with a wealthy party found liable to pay a proportion of his children’s private school fees which he had failed to do having acquired a criminal conviction for abuse of his wife and subsequent loss of his job. The parties had jointly decided to privately educate their children and the wife who had sought at court for the parties to share equally in the cost, was found liable to pay the greater share from capital. Notwithstanding his substantially smaller burden, the decision was appealed by the husband, subjecting his former wife to yet more stress and cost in defending the appeal, and his children to uncertainty in their schooling. His appeal failed on the basis that the ability to pay aliment/school fees is not restricted to income, and his other resources could be considered.
The Scottish Law Commission’s current programme by public demand is to review the law of civil remedies for domestic abuse which are currently spread over many statutes, creating confusion for victims to understand and practitioners to advise. The Commission is tasked with considering whether the current civil remedies are fit for purpose, for example to address both physical and mental abuse, and whether the law can be simplified and updated. I await their findings with interest.
On the flip side is the impact upon solicitors advising and supporting clients through a separation from a malignant relationship with the solicitor often bearing the brunt of the perpetrator’s ire whether through abusive correspondence, or in person at court. I have seen solicitors felt drained and sucked into the conflict, which can be deeply distressing.
Litigation as the nuclear option for resolving a dispute is stressful for all parties. While every effort can be made to settle throughout the action and ideally before substantial costs mount, too often cases settle at the doors of court with an unwelcome degree of pressure upon the litigant to accept a compromise or face an uncertain outcome with the possibility of an award of expenses against them. Over the course of the year I have seen litigants subsequently claim that they were not in a position to make an informed decision at the time, or that they were cognitively impaired at the time in an attempt to revisit a settlement. This has led to further litigation via appeals, and while such attempts were unsuccessful, they incurred further cost and uncertainty for the parties and the solicitors involved.
Discussions about the timing of appointing a curator to a party in an action where there is a question mark over their ability to instruct a solicitor and take advice are more frequent with an unhappy lack of clarity between being certain there is of lack of capacity for which the bar is understandably and necessarily high, and the circumstance where a client is simply unable mentally to understand and take advice. They possibly having gone through various sets of solicitors with no end in sight for the other party. In such cases, the appointment of a third party by the court to represent their interests would support resolution. While there are specific rules for the appointment of a curator to a defender in a case, I have seen the court persuaded to make the same appointment for a pursuer.
Children
While the vast bulk of financial provision cases settle out of court, the majority of the cases decided in Scottish courts over the course of 2023 concerned children, and disputes about their care, schooling (as above) and relocation. In cases concerning a wish by one party to relocate with a child to another country, there is increasing precedent for the impact upon the relationship between the parent “left behind” and the child as the most significant determining factor with clear evidence of the significant benefit to the child required to overcome that. This has frequently resulted in the party with whom the child predominantly lives, finding themselves alone following a relationship breakdown, without family and/or limited friends’ support, being denied the ability to move closer to that support system or even job opportunities.
Children’s views are at the centre of any such cases, and the taking of their views is mandatory, but the timing of taking those views is discretionary. In other words, the requirement to take a child’s views during proceedings does not arise in relation to every decision hearing or step in the process.
There is no equivalent to Cafcass in Scotland and, unlike in England, parties are not compelled to try mediation prior to litigating in Scotland, but increasingly parties are not only actively encouraged but directed by a court to try and resolve the issue with the assistance of a mediator, recognising the devasting impact upon a child of warring parents, the effects of which can transcend into adulthood and an ability to have healthy relationships.
Recognition that a source of difficulty between parties is their need and ability to communicate in a respectful and meaningful way, the use of the Our Family Wizarding app, widely used in England, is routinely being considered in Scotland. Use of this tool also reduces a party’s ability to manipulate, manufacture and/or delete messages with the use of readily available and free online malware designed for that purpose, which can be extremely convincing and therefore misleading for a court.
Fertility
The number of clients experiencing fertility issues has risen, with those on assisted reproduction waiting lists increasing. The UK surrogacy laws were rushed through Parliament in 1985 following the Kim Cotton affair, subject to much press attention. Surrogacy is once again in the press with Italy having approved a bill criminalising people who go abroad to have children via surrogacy. In March of 2023, the Scottish Law Commission and the Law Commission of England and Wales published their joint report entitled “Building families through surrogacy”, a new law which report and draft bill outline a new regulatory regime for surrogacy. It is proposed that a new surrogacy pathway is made available to all domestic surrogacy agreements, where the surrogate and intended parents are based in the UK and assisted reproduction procedures take place here. It will introduce essential safeguards before conception, so that state regulation comes before, not after, the birth of the child. If these safeguards are complied with, and eligibility conditions are met, then the intended parents and surrogate will be eligible for admission to the new pathway, which will enable the intended parents to become the child’s legal parents at birth. Under the new pathway, there will be no requirement for an application to be made to the court for a parental order. Instead, the new pathway will be overseen by non-profit-making surrogacy organisations.
The Scottish courts continue to interpret the relevant statutory requirements to successfully confer parentage upon intended parents in a surrogacy case with care and compassion, but also with a significant degree of flexibility. The law requires an application to be made for a parental order within six months of the birth and if not married or in a civil partnership, by parties living as partners in an enduring family relationship. A recent case concerned such a couple, but an application made after the six-month period and after their separation. The Scottish court found that the reading down of these requirements so as to achieve consistency with the rights of the child to a family and private life was preferred. It cannot have been the intention of parliament that a failure to apply within six months should operate as barring the application. What is required is an unambiguous intention to create and maintain family life and a factual matrix consistent with that intention. Legal reality should match day-to-day reality for the child with the parental order granted.
Vital for families embarking upon a fertility journey, or as still so often happens, for families having already had a child through donor conception via a clandestine arrangement possibly even unknown to the resulting child, is the need to access therapeutic services. Whilst solicitors can proffer legal advice, for a family facing the reality of informing a teenage child that they are not biologically their parent or parents is not appropriately addressed by anyone other than a specially trained clinical psychologist.
AI/Cyber – What are we Facing?
In March 2020, we embraced technological change at a far greater pace than would have otherwise been the case as a result of COVID-19. Online hearings were commonplace, and people welcomed the efficiency, albeit they were not without their challenges, particularly with junior practitioners suffering in not seeing what is being said, arguments made and what submissions would find favour with a sheriff. We increasingly use social media to promote our businesses and to seek assistance. It is felt that live streaming can open the doors of the court, assisting in improving public perception of the legal process. The Supreme Court has been doing it for years with its large geographical reach.
This summer, we had the inauguration of Court of Session live, which the public can watch, mostly appellate decisions, and see with their own eyes the reassuringly professional and largely uneventful cases that run. However, will there be a place for AI in judging/dispute resolution? On 8 November 2023, the Daily Mail reported that two AI robots had negotiated a contract for the first time with no human involved. It was a legally binding Non-Disclosure Agreement. The contract was finalised within minutes and the only time a human was required was to add their signature.
It is fair to observe that if machinery was involved in conflict resolution it would likely be cheaper than judges and solicitors. However, the reassuring and overwhelming message at present is that AI is poorly placed to cope with the vagaries and human aspects of family law. In that respect, I include equality and diversity, and non-discrimination and the particular issues that arise in family law. People have a right to a decision by a human who can be held accountable and detail their reasoning. How would you, for instance, prepare an appeal of a decision of a robot. As I have set out above, the most common outcome is that cases settle and so there is not much data about. Laws change and social circumstances change, and I would question how would a computer keep up with that. Judiciary has a significant role in providing legal authority. Also, constitutional issues arises if authority to make decisions does not arrive from a human being.
Humans have to justify decisions creating a legal narrative for one position over another. Family law is not unique in that, but family law specifically deals with human relationships, especially acute issues and human fact matters. There is the psychological trauma of dealing with difficult challenging clients, human problems and traumatised and hurt human beings. How would a computer deal with that?
Marriage Age
We have seen a divergence between Scotland and England in the age at which a party can marry. Until the commencement of the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Act 2022, the age at which a person could marry in the UK was 16. The 2022 Act increased the minimum age for marriage in England to 18 years old with the need to obtain the consent of a parent or guardian abolished. The equivalent Scots law is contained in the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977, which provides that anyone can marry so long as they have reached the age of 16, with no requirement to obtain the consent of a parent or guardian. The same applies in Northern Ireland. Young English couples can no longer pop over the border to marry between the ages of 16 and 17 because their marriage will not be recognised in England. Positively, teenage weddings are relatively uncommon in Scotland, but children, particularly vulnerable women and girls, should be safeguarded from forced marriages at 16. The Scottish government is set to formally consult on changing the law in Scotland.
Financial Provision
It is a well-established tenet of Scots law that the making of an award of financial provision under the 1985 Act is a matter of discretion aimed at achieving a fair and practicable result in accordance with common sense. Flexibility is permitted in the statute. The court is also tasked with assessing reasonableness, having regard to the resources of the parties. A rare family case heard in the Inner House in August 2023, provided clear authority of just how flexible the courts can be in their aim to achieve fairness and a clean break between divorcing parties, and the option for the court to consider not only current resources but importantly future resources when making its determination. The initial decision in Foster v Foster had resulted in Mrs Foster remaining a minority shareholder in a private limited company operated by Mr Foster on the basis he had insufficient resources with which to purchase her shares. Neither party wanted the company sold. However, Mrs Foster had concluded for a capital sum and an order in terms of 14(2)(k) for any ancillary order which the court regarded as necessary to grant orders for financial provision. The Inner House (Foster v Foster [2023] CSIH 35) found that proper consideration had not been given to Mr Foster paying Mrs Foster in capital instalments for her shareholding nor his foreseeable resources. Mr Foster was ordered to pay Mrs Foster the value of her shareholding in four annual instalments with an ancillary order made for Mrs Foster to transfer her shareholding to Mr Foster within 28 days of decree of divorce. Clean break achieved.
Summary
It is likely that the overarching trend for family law is the need for greater training, understanding and support for vulnerable children, for vulnerable adults and dare I say it solicitors advising people in emotionally charged cases. We all need clarity in relation to cyber security, the application and impact of AI and a disgruntled party’s ability to use it for their own end. Our legislation provides the courts with the discretion it needs to ensure fairness – in decisions but possible legal reform concerning the age of marriage.
Princes Exchange
1 Earl Grey Street
Edinburgh
EH3 9EE
Scotland
+44 131 228 8111
www.turcanconnell.com