Named person legal challenge in Supreme Court on 8 March

The fight against the Scottish Government’s plan to assign a named person to every child is to go before the Supreme Court on 8 March next year.

Two days have been set aside for legal arguments to be heard. The appeal seeks to stop the controversial scheme being implemented later in 2016.

The legal challenge to the Named Person legislation is being contested by a coalition of groups, spearheaded by The Christian Institute, CARE (Christian Action Research and Education), TYMES Trust and the Family Education Trust.

State interference

Simon Calvert, spokesman for the No to Named Persons campaign group, commented: “The right to a family life unhindered by state interference is of such vital importance that we feel we have no option but to bring the matter before the Supreme Court.

“The Scottish Government’s plans are uninvited, unwelcome and undemocratic.”

NO2NP have criticised the legislation since its inception, arguing that the Scottish Government is acting illegally and exceeding its powers by setting up the scheme.

Private life

The group says that appointing state monitors directly contravenes the European Convention on Human Rights which defends a family’s right to a private life.

In addition, the campaigners object to the way the Scottish Government wants to share private and confidential data on families with numerous organisations.

Scotland’s highest court rejected concerns raised earlier this year, when three judges from the Inner House of the Court of Session ruled that the legislation does not conflict with human rights or data protection laws.


Academics, medical experts and social service professionals are among those who have expressed support for NO2NP.

Mr Calvert said: “We believe that so far the courts have failed to grasp what the legislation means in practice. Their failure to even try to understand the proper meaning of ‘wellbeing’ – the key concept in the legislation – is just one of the more obvious problems with the previous ruling.

“Pursuing this case is also vital to differentiate what the law actually says from what the Government PR machine is trying to sell.


“Despite the Government’s protestations to the contrary, the Named Person scheme is mandatory, not voluntary, it requires state officials to monitor the happiness of children, which is a parent’s job, and it lowers the threshold at which personal data on children and their families can be shared between countless officials, without their consent.

“Mums and dads must be allowed to bring up their children as they see fit and not according to government checklists.”

He added: “Almost 15,000 Scots have signed our petition and at our public meetings all over the country, the story is the same – the more people hear about the Named Person scheme, the more people are saying ‘No’.”

Related Resources