LESLIE WILLIAM HALL AGAINST KRISTINA ELEANOR HALL

The Sheriff Principal, having resumed consideration of the cause, Refuses the appeal; Remits the cause to the sheriff to proceed as accords; Reserves the question of expenses.

[1] This is an appeal from the interlocutor of the sheriff who granted final orders for three of the children of the parties to reside with the respondent and the other child to reside with the appellant. He appeals against the first part of the order. The sheriff also continued the cause on the procedure roll to determine further procedure. The outstanding issues in the cause, in so far as material, were the appellant’s craves for divorce and interdict preventing the respondent from removing the children outwith the jurisdiction, as indeed was the question of expenses.

[2] It was plain to me on sight of the sheriff’s interlocutor that a question arose about whether leave to appeal of the sheriff was required. But in the light of the considerable delay in the action over many years and the effect which that must be having on the children, I decided albeit with considerable hesitation to allow the appeal to be continued. The respondent’s solicitor did not raise the question.

[4] I have also decided that it is not open to me to remit the cause to the sheriff to consider whether leave should be granted. In any event, even if that were competent, it is now far too late in the appeal for such a course to be prudent.

[5] For present purposes, therefore, it is sufficient for me to refuse the appeal as incompetent. But I still must have regard to the interests of the children. Accordingly, I shall set out the reasons why even if leave had been granted I would have refused the appeal on the merits. This is particularly critical given the conduct and approach of the appellant, as I discuss below.