A contact and specific issue order case involving a father in Canada and a child living in Scotland, decided by reference to the child’s own views about how contact should work in practice.
Background
The parties married in 2012, separated in 2021 and were divorced in Canada in August 2022. The parties and their daughter, born in 2015 and aged 10, are British and Canadian nationals. The father resides in Canada; the child lives with her mother in Scotland.
The father sought an order for direct and indirect contact, together with a specific issue order regulating who should hold the child’s passports.
The issues
Much was agreed. The parties accepted that residential contact should take place in Scotland, and Easter contact was agreed. Four matters remained in dispute: whether October residential contact should begin on the last Wednesday of term-time or on the first day of the school holiday; whether there should be direct contact on a further 30 days each year to accommodate extended family celebrations and special events; whether indirect video contact should take place once or twice weekly, and for how long; and who should hold the child’s British and Canadian passports once issued.
The decision
Lady Tait approached the case on the basis that the child’s welfare was the paramount consideration, that no order should be made unless it would be better for her that the order be made than not, and that regard had to be had to her views taking account of her age and maturity, together with the factors in section 11(7A) to (7D) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 where applicable.
The child was clear and consistent that she wished to see her father and to receive calls from him. She wanted greater flexibility, and for indirect contact to be less regimented. She felt pressure to call at particular times, and became stressed about her father’s anticipated reaction if she did not.
The court emphasised the mother’s responsibility to encourage, prioritise and support weekly indirect contact, that being in the child’s best interests in maintaining her relationship with her father. A specific issue order was made in relation to the child’s passports.
Why this decision matters
Where contact is agreed in principle, disputes often turn on mechanics: start dates, frequency, duration and who holds documents. The court will resolve those details, and a well-prepared position on each is worth more than general argument.
A child’s views may be less about whether contact happens than about how it happens. Rigid schedules can themselves become a source of stress, and the court will listen to that.
An order recording the resident parent’s responsibility to support indirect contact reflects that maintaining a long-distance relationship depends on practical co-operation, not merely permission.
Legal review: Brian Rooney, Managing Partner and Law Society of Scotland Accredited Specialist in Family Law.