Another contact case made its way to the Inner House and this time the decision of the sheriff was restored, with emphasis placed on him having the advantage over the sheriff principal who had overturned his decision, of having seen and heard the witnesses.
M v M  CSIH 2; 2016 GWD 3-75 concerned a Ugandan father who had been imprisoned for breach of immigration laws. The sheriff had refused contact and deprived the father of parental responsibilities and rights.
The Inner House held that there was nothing in the additional findings in fact made by the sheriff principal which entitled him to interfere with the sheriff's decision. The limitations on the function of an appellate court were well settled.
Even had the sheriff principal been entitled to reverse the sheriff's decision, he ought to have referred the issue of contact to a sheriff to be reheard of new.