New Judgment: The Christian Institute & Ors v The Lord Advocate (Scotland) [2016] UKSC 51
28 Thursday Jul 2016
Matrix Legal Support Service New Judgments
Share it
On appeal from: [2015] CSIH 64
The Supreme Court has unanimously allowed the appeal, in a case where four registered charities with interests in family matters and three individual parents challenged the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2012, which made provision for a named person to be assigned to each child and young person in Scotland. The parties sought judicial review of Pt 4, in particular, which sets out the functions that such named persons were to exercise. It also sets out provisions for information sharing between the named person service provider and other relevant service providers or authorities.
The appellants argued that the legislation was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament under the Scotland Act 1998, as it related to a matter that were reserved to the UK Parliament, it was incompatible with the ECHR and/or it was incompatible with EU law. Both the Outer House and Inner House of the Court of Session had disagreed with the appellants.
The Supreme Court did not find that Pt 4 related to matters which were reserved to the UK Parliament, as the provision for data sharing did not detract from the Data Protection Act regime and Directive, and was not distinct from the overall purpose of promoting the welfare of children and young persons, which was not a reserved matter.
However, it did allow the appeal on the basis of the ECHR challenge. It found that the Pt 4 was not in accordance with law, because it was drafted in a manner that lacked safeguards for examining whether access to private information was proportionate to the individuals’ ECHR, art 8 rights. The Supreme Court found that the legislation itself could be proportionate, as it pursued a legitimate policy aim and was rationally connected to those aims. However, the manner in which it was likely to operate risked a disproportionate interference in particular cases.
The Supreme Court also found that the scheme was incompatible with EU law, to the extent that it mirrored the ECHR challenge.
For judgment, please download: [2016] UKSC 51
For Court’s press summary, please download: Court’s Press Summary
For a non-PDF version of the judgment, please visit: BAILII
To watch the hearings please visit: Supreme Court website
(8 Mar 2016 morning session), (8 Mar 2016 afternoon session) and (9 Mar 2016 morning session)
1 comment
Andrew said:
31/07/2016 at 20:56
It would have been good to see this horrible scheme knocked on the head for good and all. It is all about children as the property of the State. No thanks.
Does anybody know who it was, or rather probably still is, who these “named persons” are to be? Is it to be a whole new profession or are the existing social workers (who do not enjoy the fullest measure of public confidence) to be given this new task?