Category: Adoption

In Re F (Minors) (Adoption: Freeing Order): CA 4 Jul 2000

A judge had declined to make a freeing order, where it was clear that the children would not be returned to their parents, and the proposed adoption arrangements, which would split the children between two families, was opposed by the father on that ground. The judge felt that a reasonable parent could well oppose arrangements which would mean the children losing contact with each other. On appeal the judge’s order was overturned. The correct question to determine the reasonableness of an objection was, applying the evidence, and the current values of society, whether the advantages of adoption justified the overriding of the parent’s wishes.

Citations:

Times 04-Jul-2000, Gazette 07-Sep-2000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Re C (a Minor) (Adoption: Parental Agreement: Contact) CA 1993
Where adoption is to be considered against the will of the parent, the court should recognise when asking whether the opposition was unreasonable that the test is objective and supposes that this person is endowed with a mind and temperament capable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81878

In Re J (A Minor) (Adoption: Appointment of Guardian ad Litem): CA 19 Mar 1999

In contested adoption proceedings the choice of guardian ad litem was entirely a matter for the judge. A guardian with good and long standing knowledge of the child would not be set aside for allegations of bias rejected by the judge.

Citations:

Times 19-Mar-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Adoption

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81952

In Re B (A Minor)(Adoption Order: Nationality): CA 16 Mar 1998

Any benefit of nationality obtained through an adoption is a side benefit, and is irrelevant to the substantive issues of the propriety of that adoption. An adoption undertaken principally for that purpose was wrong.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Apr-1998, Times 16-Mar-1998

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Adoption

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81713

In re G (a Child) (Care proceedings: Placement for Adoption): CA 14 Jul 2005

Grandparents appealed aganst an order of the judge releasing the care of the child to the local authority with a view to adoption.
Held: The findings of fact and reasoning were insufficiently well set out and the judge had given insufficient consideration to the right of a child to grow up within its family. The decision was set aside.

Citations:

Times 01-Aug-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re B (Appeal: Lack of Reasons) 2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.229648

Biddulph v Birmingham City Council, Biddulph B (Children) Mr and Mrs A: CA 28 Apr 2004

The children had been subject to an adoption order. They had been placed outside the jurisdiction for adoption. The parents appealed refusal of their application for revocation of the order. Initially places had been found for the four children together, and an urgent request made for permission. The judge had said that since they were not in care, no application was required. A placement together failed, and the authority had made other arrangements. That placement was and remained lawful. Section 20 was not to be read as restricted to a lawful placement.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

[2004] EWCA (Civ) 515, Times 10-Jun-2004

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 20(1)(b) 55 56

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.196057

In Re B (Minor: Adoption): CA 23 Mar 2001

Where in adoption proceedings, the experts advising the court including the guardian ad litem, and an experienced child psychiatrist had indicated opposition to the proposed adoption, it could not be said that the natural father was unreasonable to oppose the adoption. Since it could not proceed without this consent, or his opposition disposed of as unreasonable, the adoption could not proceed. The court had given insufficient weight to the father’s human right to respect for family life.

Citations:

Times 23-Mar-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption, Human Rights

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.81722

In re S (a Child: Adoption): CA 7 Oct 2008

The mother sought an order to revoke a placement order.
Held: Her appeal succeeded. The judge had erred turning a pragmatic approach into a reckless one, in that he had failed to distinguish between a prospective adopter as required by the Act, and a potential adopter as in this case.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Keene and Mr Justice Hedley

Links:

Times

Statutes:

Adoption and Children Act 2002 18(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.280415

In re H (a Minor): 1986

Citations:

[1986] Fam 121

Cited by:

Cited – In Re K (A Minor) (Adoption Order: Nationality) CA 22-Apr-1994
The child was born in Sierra Leone. Her mother died, and her aunt had adopted her in Sierra Leone in 1991. She came to England where a further adoption order was obtained only a few days short of her eighteenth birthday when the court made an order . .
Cited – In Re K (A Minor) (Residence Order) CA 26-Nov-1998
The father had been denied access to his child in India. The child had been brought back to England through wardship proceedings. He resisted an application by the mother to take the child to India for a temporary stay. The mother appealed an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Adoption

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.241336

Re RA (Minors): 1974

An adoption order was set aside for a procedural irregularity.

Citations:

(1974) Fam Law 182

Cited by:

Cited – Alexander Cameron (Ap) v Ian Macintyre Gibson, As Executor Dative of the Late Dugald Macintyre and Another SCS 2-Dec-2003
An adoption order had been made, but at the time, the adopted child was over the maximum age. Application was made to set it aside.
Held: Adoption orders could not be set aside save for where some fraud could be demonstrated to have been . .
Cited – Webster (the Parents) v Norfolk County Council and others CA 11-Feb-2009
Four brothers and sisters had been adopted after the parents had been found to have abused them. The parents now had expert evidence that the injuries may have been the result of scurvy, and sought leave to appeal.
Held: Leave was refused. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194028

Re D (Minors): CA 6 Dec 1994

The Guardian ad litem had been wrong to promise confidentiality to a child. Such confidentiality could only be within the discretion of the judge.

Citations:

Independent 06-Dec-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.85748

In re L (An Infant): CA 1962

That a proposed adoption of a child would be in the child’s best interests is not necessarily an indication that the parent’s opposition to the adoption is unreasonable: ‘A reasonable mother surely gives great weight to what is better for the child. Her anguish of mind is quite understandable; but still it may be unreasonable for her to withhold consent. We must look and see whether it is reasonable or unreasonable according to what a reasonable woman in her place would do in all the circumstances of the case.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

(1962) 106 SJ 611

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust and Another v H and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered when adoption law would allow an adoption without the consent of the birth parent where there had been some continuing contact between that parent and the child.
Held: (Baroness Hale dissenting) The appeal against the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.243098

A and S (Children) v Lancashire County Council: FD 17 Apr 2013

The children applied for their costs. They had been made subject of freeing orders on the application of the respondent, but had then successfully appealed against the orders, saying that their human rights had been infringed.

Judges:

Peter Jackson J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 851 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Senior Courts Act 1981 51(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – HB v PB FD 9-Jul-2013
Claim for costs against third party local authority, Croydon LBC after four day private law fact finding hearing. F said that M had fabricated illnesses both in herself and the child leading to the LA being asked to prepare a report. That report . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Costs

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.472649

In re W (A Minor) (Adoption Agency: Wardship): 1990

The court considered the requirments for adoption of a child subject to wardship.

Citations:

[1990] Fam 156

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Adoption

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.588167

Regina v Derbyshire County Council, ex parte T: CA 1990

The court upheld the decision of Swinton Thomas J to grant certiorari to quash the decision of a local authority to move a child to prospective adopters without informing the child’s parents and in an attempt to prevent them making an application to the court for the revocation of a freeing order previously made in relation to the child.

Citations:

[1990] Fam. 164

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (A Child) (Placement Order); C v East Sussex County Council (Adoption) CA 1-May-2008
The father sought to revoke a freeing order. He said that the social workers had conspired to exclude him from the process. The child was born of a casual relationship, and at first he was unaware of the proceedings. On learning of them he sought to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.271031

T, Petitioner: IHCS 1997

The House discussed the duties of a court in adoption cases: ‘There can be no more fundamental principle in adoption cases than that it is the duty of the court to safeguard and promote the interests of the child. Issues relating to the sexual orientation, lifestyle, race, religion or other characteristics of the parties involved must of course be taken into account as part of the circumstances. But they cannot be allowed to prevail over what is in the best interests of the child.’

Citations:

1997 SLT 724

Cited by:

Cited – In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Adoption

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.270011

Kuijper v Netherlands: ECHR 3 Mar 2005

The court considered provisions allowing the adoption of a child against the wishes of the parents. The parents complained that the procedure was not in accordance with law because it lacked legal certainty.
Held: The claim failed. A measure of vagueness in the law is inevitable if excessive rigidity is to be avoided, and legislation may have to avoid excessive rigidity if it is to keep pace with changing circumstances.
‘As regards the applicant’s argument that the Arts 1:228 and 3.13 of the Civil Code and their application in practice fell short of the requirement of foreseeability, the Court considers that it is a logical consequence of the principle that laws must be of general application that the wording of statutory provisions is not always precise. The need to avoid excessive rigidity and to keep pace with changing circumstances means that many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague. However clearly drafted a legal provision may be, its application in practice involves an inevitable element of judicial interpretation and assessment of facts, which do not by itself make a legal provision unforeseeable in its application. On many occasions and in very different spheres the Court has held that it is in the first place for the national authorities, and in particular the courts, to construe and apply the domestic law (see, for example, Winterwerp v Netherlands (1979) 2 EHRR 387 at [46]; Iglesias Gil v Spain (2005) 40 EHRR 3 at [61]; and Slivenko v Latvia: (2004) 39 EHRR 24 at [105]).
Accordingly, an issue of foreseeability could only arise under the Convention if the national courts’ assessment of the facts or domestic law was manifestly unreasonable or arbitrary.’

Citations:

(2005) 41 EHRR SE 266, 64848/01

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Adoption

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.240052

Re C (A Minor) (Adoption Order: Conditions): HL 1988

The House considered the question of conditions to be applied to any continued contact with a child after adoption. Lord Ackner said: ‘The cases rightly stress that in normal circumstances it is desirable that there should be a complete break, but that each case has to be considered on its own particular facts. No doubt the Court will not, except in the most exceptional case, impose terms or conditions as to access to members of the child’s natural family to which the adopting parents do not agree. To do so would be to create a potentially frictional situation which would be hardly likely to safeguard or promote the welfare of the child. Where no agreement is forthcoming the court will, with very rare exceptions, have to choose between making an adoption order without terms or conditions as to access, or to refuse to make such an order and seek to safeguard access through some other machinery, such as wardship. To do otherwise would be merely inviting future and almost immediate litigation.’

Judges:

Lord Ackner

Citations:

[1988] 2 FLR 159, [1989] AC 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re R (A Child) CA 18-Aug-2005
An application was made for continued contact after a proposed adoption. The mother was young and had herself lost her family and taken into care when very young.
Held: Her request for permission to appeal failed. Wall LJ ‘I am reasonably . .
Cited – Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust and Another v H and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered when adoption law would allow an adoption without the consent of the birth parent where there had been some continuing contact between that parent and the child.
Held: (Baroness Hale dissenting) The appeal against the . .
Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v X and Others CA 27-May-2010
The LA, the guardian and adoptive parents appealed against an order that they should provide to the parents an annual photograph of the child. They contended that an image should only be made available to be viewed at the authority’s offices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230247

Lawson v Registrar General: 1956

An application was made for disclosure by the Registrar of his records so that an adopted child could be contacted and informed of a significant legacy to which she would be entitled.
Held: Disclosure of such records was severely restricted, but could be made where it would be in the child’s best interests. This would be one such category of case.

Citations:

(1956) 105 LJ 204

Cited by:

Cited – Re H (Adoption: Disclosure of Information ) 1995
An application was made by the sister of an adopted child for disclosure of the records held in order to allow her to make contact and to warn her of the fact that she might have an inherited genetic disease.
Held: The jurisdiction to grant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Administrative

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230135

D v Registrar General: 1997

The court considered the procedure to be followed in applications for disclosure to other family members of information held by the Registrar to allow them to contact the adopted child.

Citations:

[1997] 2 FLR 240

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 50

Cited by:

Cited – X (Adopted Child: Access To Court File) FC 9-Sep-2014
The applicant’s father had been adopted. Both he and the adopting parents had since died. The applicant now sought disclosure of the records to reveal her the court record of her father’s adoption order.
Held: The order should be made. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.230137

Re D (a minor) (adoption order: validity): 1991

The grant of an injunction during the continuance of a wardship does not of itself entitle a child to a continuing injunction after reaching adulthood.

Citations:

[1991] Fam 137

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – X, A Woman Formerly Known As Mary Bell v Stephen O’Brien, News Group Newspapers Ltd MGN Ltd QBD 21-May-2003
An injunction effective against the world, was granted to restrain any act to identify the claimant in the media, including the Internet. She had been convicted of murder when a child, and had since had a child herself. An order had been granted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.199556

In re W (An Infant): HL 1971

The court considered the reasonability of parental disagreement in applications for adoption: ‘Two reasonable parents can perfectly reasonably come to opposite conclusions on the same set of facts without forfeiting their title to be regarded as reasonable. The question in any given case is whether a parental veto comes within the band of possible reasonable decisions and not whether it is right or mistaken. Not every reasonable exercise of judgment is right, and not every mistaken exercise of judgment is unreasonable. There is a band of decisions within which no court should seek to replace the individual’s judgment with his own.’ and ‘. . the test is reasonableness and not anything else. It is not culpability. It is not indifference. It is not failure to discharge parental duties. It is reasonableness, and reasonableness in the context of the totality of the circumstances. But, although welfare per se is not the test, the fact that a reasonable parent does pay regard to the welfare of his child must enter into the question of reasonableness as a relevant factor. It is relevant in all cases if and to the extent that a reasonable parent would take it into account. It is decisive in those cases where a reasonable parent must so regard it.’

Judges:

Lord Hailsham LC

Citations:

[1971] AC 682

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Distinguished – Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions) HL 7-Jun-1994
The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order.
Held: When an application was made on the . .
Cited – Malekshad v Howard De Walden Estates Limited CA 23-May-2001
The applicant sought the leasehold enfranchisement of two leasehold properties. They were contained in separate leases, but the property had been treated as one for some time. A part of one property extended under part of the other. The claim was . .
Cited – Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust and Another v H and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered when adoption law would allow an adoption without the consent of the birth parent where there had been some continuing contact between that parent and the child.
Held: (Baroness Hale dissenting) The appeal against the . .
Cited – Re C (a Minor) (Adoption: Parental Agreement: Contact) CA 1993
Where adoption is to be considered against the will of the parent, the court should recognise when asking whether the opposition was unreasonable that the test is objective and supposes that this person is endowed with a mind and temperament capable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182988

Re B (Adoption: Setting Aside): FD 10 May 1994

There is no provision for the annulment of an adoption order for mistake.

Citations:

Independent 10-May-1994, [1995] 1 Fam L R 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Re B (Adoption: Setting Aside) CA 22-Mar-1995
Where the child’s natural mother did not receive service of the adoption petition and had no other knowledge that an attempt was being made to adopt the child; in that event it can be considered that there is a fundamental injustice to the natural . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Re B (Adoption: Setting Aside) CA 22-Mar-1995
Where the child’s natural mother did not receive service of the adoption petition and had no other knowledge that an attempt was being made to adopt the child; in that event it can be considered that there is a fundamental injustice to the natural . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.85722

In Re W (A Minor) (Adoption: Homosexual Adopter): FD 21 May 1997

There is no rule of law against adoption of a child by a single person living within a homosexual relationship. The court must always look to the best interests of the child in question. The court recognised the couple as constituting a family: ‘The family in question comprises two women living together in lesbian relationship.’

Judges:

Singer J

Citations:

Times 21-May-1997, Gazette 18-Jun-1997, [1998] Fam 58

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd HL 28-Oct-1999
Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member
The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Human Rights

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.82264

In Re M (Minors) (Adoption: Disclosure): FD 29 Jul 1999

Where a local authority was acting as an adoption agency, it should provide in its report to the adoption panel, the views of the guardian ad litem where these were known to them. If the guardian had not come to a conclusion, that fact should be stated since it was a negative fact of direct relevance.

Citations:

Times 29-Jul-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.82031

In Re B (Minors) (Contact): CA 3 Feb 1993

The Judge had a discretion to look again at the natural mother’s case before making an adoption order. In order to minimise delay in any case, and to facilitate efficient decision-making, the court could, exercising its wide judicial discretion, consider the application for leave to apply for an order revoking the placement order on a reasonably limited evidential basis.

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

Gazette 03-Feb-1993, [1994] 2 FLR 1

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 1 34(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (A Child) (Placement Order); C v East Sussex County Council (Adoption) CA 1-May-2008
The father sought to revoke a freeing order. He said that the social workers had conspired to exclude him from the process. The child was born of a casual relationship, and at first he was unaware of the proceedings. On learning of them he sought to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.81723

Re G (A Child): CA 8 Nov 2017

Father’s appeal from the dismissal of his application under section 47(5) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 for leave to oppose the making of an adoption order in respect of his child.

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 2638

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620144

DL and Another v London Borough of Newham: Admn 27 May 2011

The Claimants sought judicial review of i) the decision of the Defendant to give them a notice under section 35(2) of the 2002 Act, the effect of which was to require them to return K to the Defendant, and ii) the decision of the Defendant not to return K to their day to day care with a view to his adoption by them. The Claimants’ ultimate aim was to adopt K.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1127 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Adoption and Children Act 2002 35(2), Human Rights Act 1998 3, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption, Human Rights

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.440229

T Petitioner: OHCS 20 Aug 1996

A homosexual sought an adoption order. He intended to raise the child with his male partner. The relationship was readily described as constituting a family. But as for an heterosexual couple the existence of children was not a necessary factor for entitling the couple to qualify as a family. The couple would qualify by themselves, just as they would continue to do after the adopted child had grown up and started an independent life. There was no principle against an adoption by a male homosexual to be brought up by a male couple.

Citations:

Times 20-Aug-1996, 1997 SLT 724

Statutes:

Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978

Cited by:

Cited – Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd HL 28-Oct-1999
Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member
The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Scotland

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.89685

Lincolnshire County Council v R-J and Others, X and Another Intervening: FD 20 Feb 1998

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply when considering the freedom of a couple to adopt a child; a caution for an offence of Actual Bodily Harm to child was a bar to adoption.

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-1998, Gazette 11-Mar-1998

Statutes:

Children (Protection from Offenders) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 1997 (1997 No 2308)

Adoption

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83072

In Re R (A Child) (Adoption: Duty to Investigate): FD 13 Feb 2001

Where a mother decided to give up her child for adoption, and was against the involvement of members of her family, there was no right in the family to receive information nor duty on Social Services to tell them about the adoption. There was no explicit right under the Human Rights Convention nor statutory provision which would impose such a duty, and there were clear circumstances where the passing on of such information to an extended family could cause actual harm.

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-2001

Adoption, Human Rights

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82131

In Re R (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Teenage Mother): FD 19 Jul 2000

There is no general rule that the baby of a young teenage mother should be adopted. Nevertheless it would not be right to concentrate on the interests of the mother as a child. The unborn child must be given equal consideration, and a twin-track approach to planning must be used. Where appropriate suitable adopters could be identified before the child’s birth, although this must not pre-empt the decision of the court. An interim placement of the child should be determined on evidence as a matter of urgency after the child’s birth.

Citations:

Times 19-Jul-2000

Children, Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82134

In Re R (A Minor) (Inter-Country Adoptions: Practice): FD 20 Jan 1999

The court set down procedures to be followed in inter-country adoptions which were intended to remove the considerable deal and temptation to suppress the truth currently characterising such proceedings. The present system created injustice for the child.

Citations:

Times 20-Jan-1999, Gazette 10-Feb-1999

Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82137

In Re N (A Minor) (Adoption: Foreign Guardianship): FD 27 Jun 2000

Somebody who had been appointed guardian of a child by a foreign court but which order was recognised here, had sufficient standing to be the person entitled to give consent to an adoption or whose consent could be dispensed with. The Act should be read to give a wider construction as to the person able to give consent, and the authorities interpreted accordingly.

Citations:

Times 27-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 16(1)

Adoption, Child Support

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82068

In Re P (Minors) (Adoption: Freeing Orders): FD 25 Jul 1994

A judge should not order continued contact after the making of freeing orders which were made without the consent of the mother.

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-1994, [1994] 2 FLR 1000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust and Another v H and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered when adoption law would allow an adoption without the consent of the birth parent where there had been some continuing contact between that parent and the child.
Held: (Baroness Hale dissenting) The appeal against the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82101

In Re J (Minor) (Isle of Man: Adoption): FD 7 Jun 2000

Because the Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom under the Act, proceedings for an adoption of a child from the Isle of Man were an inter-country adoption, and so had to be commenced in the High Court. There was, however, nothing to prevent the High Court transferring the case to the County Court in appropriate situations. The need arose even though the Act envisaged a child subject to a freeing order being placed with a Manx couple with a view to adoption.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jun-2000, Times 07-Jun-2000, Gazette 15-Jun-2000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 56

Adoption, Children, International

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81961

In Re K (A Minor) (Adoption Order: Nationality): CA 22 Apr 1994

The child was born in Sierra Leone. Her mother died, and her aunt had adopted her in Sierra Leone in 1991. She came to England where a further adoption order was obtained only a few days short of her eighteenth birthday when the court made an order for his adoption. The result was to confer British Naionality on him.
Held: The acquisition of Britsih Nationality on an adoption could normally be set aside only if the order was successfully appealed or otherwise failed. The court would be reluctant to deprive the Home Secretary of his right to enter an appeal. Express language would have to have been used to withdraw that right. The acquisition of nationality rights is not a relevant or proper purpose for the making of an adoption order. When carrying out the balancing factor deciding the need for adoption, the court was not to take into account benefits which might flow from the acquisition of Nationality. Where a child was nearly an adult, the benefits other than from nationality were minimal. The appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Neil LJ, Balcombe LJ, Hobhouse LJ

Citations:

Times 26-Apr-1994, Independent 27-May-1994

Statutes:

British Nationality Act 1981 1(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re H (a Minor) 1986
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Immigration

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81970

In Re J (A Minor) (Adoption: Freeing Order): FD 26 May 2000

The 1976 Act did not revoke any of the court’s inherent powers. A court could therefore revoke an order freeing a child for adoption under its own powers, and notwithstanding that no application in that behalf had been made by the mother. A change in the proposed care plan made it more appropriate for a child to continue to reside with foster parents without adoption.

Citations:

Times 26-May-2000

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976

Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81953

In Re H (A Child) (Adoption Disclosure): In Re G (A Child) (Adoption Disclosure): FD 8 Jan 2001

There is no necessity that a father without parental rights must be notified of and heard in adoption proceedings. It was a question for each case, and in circumstances where a mother might justifiably refuse to disclose the identity of the natural father, in order to preserve confidentiality, adoption might proceed without the father being identified. Unless the situation was urgent, it would be appropriate for the authority in such circumstances to apply to the court for directions. The right of the father under the Children Act to apply for parental responsibility did not make him a parent under the Adoption Act. The court did however have the discretion to involve the father. He should be informed unless, for good reasons, it was inappropriate.

Citations:

Times 08-Jan-2001

Statutes:

Children Act 1989, Adoption Act 1976

Children, Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81916

In Re C (A Minor) (Adoption – Freeing Order): FD 26 Oct 1998

The court can in exceptional circumstances exercise its inherent jurisdiction to revoke a freeing order on the application of the mother even though she had said she had no wish to be involved in the child’s future. A statutory lacuna was creating orphans.

Citations:

Times 26-Oct-1998, Gazette 25-Nov-1998

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 18(6)

Adoption

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81776

Marckx v Belgium: ECHR 13 Jun 1979

Recognition of illegitimate children

The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. A recognised ‘illegitimate’ child’s rights of inheritance on intestacy are less than those of a ‘legitimate’ child.
Held: The Belgian system infringed the right to private and family life by reducing inheritance rights for illegitimate children. The object of Article 8 is to protect the individual against arbitrary interference by the public authorities. Nevertheless, it does not merely compel the State to abstain from such interference: in addition to this primarily negative undertaking, there may be positive obligations inherent in an effective ‘respect’ for family life. Where there are no property rights which pre-exist the interference complained of, the article is not engaged. Family life ‘includes at least the ties between near relatives, for instance, those between grandparents and grandchildren, since such relatives play a considerable part in family life.’ Article 8 makes no distinction between the legitimate and illegitimate family.
Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice described the scope of article 8: ‘The emphasis is on the person’s home as a place where he is entitled to be free from arbitrary interference by the public authorities’

Judges:

Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice

Citations:

6833/74, (1979) 2 EHRR 330, [1979] ECHR 2

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 1P 8 A14

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Followed – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

Cited – James and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza CA 5-Nov-2002
The applicant sought to succeed to the tenancy of his deceased homosexual partner as his partner rather than as a member of his family.
Held: A court is bound by any decision within the normal hierachy of domestic authority as to the meaning . .
Distinguished – Inze v Austria ECHR 28-Oct-1987
Art 14 was engaged in respect of discrimination over future interests despite Marckx. The case turned on what singular provisions of Austrian inheritance law, whereby the illegitimate claimant had some, but incomplete, rights on his mother’s . .
Cited – Hollins v Russell etc CA 22-May-2003
Six appeals concerned a number of aspects of the new Conditional Fee Agreement.
Held: It should be normal for a CFA, redacted as necessary, to be disclosed for costs proceedings where a success fee is claimed. If a party seeks to rely on the . .
Cited – AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
Cited – Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 17-Jun-2003
The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .
Cited – M v London Borough of Islington and Another CA 2-Apr-2004
The applicant asylum seeker had had her application refused, and was awaiting a removal order. She had a child and asked the authority to house her pending her removal.
Held: Provided she was not in breach of the removal order, the council had . .
Cited – Singh v Entry Clearance Officer New Delhi CA 30-Jul-2004
The applicant, an 8 year old boy, became part of his Indian family who lived in England, through an adoption recognised in Indian Law, but not in English Law. Though the adoption was genuine, his family ties had not been broken in India. The family . .
Cited – National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Limited and others HL 30-Jun-2005
Former HL decision in Siebe Gorman overruled
The company had become insolvent. The bank had a debenture and claimed that its charge over the book debts had become a fixed charge. The preferential creditors said that the charge was a floating charge and that they took priority.
Held: The . .
Cited – Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others Admn 29-Jul-2005
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market . .
Cited – Smith v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered whether under the 1992 Regulations a self-employed parent could use for his child support calculation his net earnings as declared to the Revenue, which would allow deduction of capital and other allowances properly claimed . .
Cited – In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .
Cited – EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 22-Oct-2008
The claimant challenged the respondent’s decision to order the return of herself and her son to Lebanon.
Held: The test for whether a claimant’s rights would be infringed to such an extent as to prevent their return home was a strict one, but . .
Cited – Re E (A Child); E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and others intervening) HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) Children had been taken to school in the face of vehement protests from Loyalists. The parents complained that the police had failed to protect them properly, since the behaviour was so bad as to amount to inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Pearce v Mayfield School CA 31-Jul-2001
The claimant teacher was a lesbian. She complained that her school in failed to protect her against abuse from pupils for her lesbianism. She appealed against a decision that the acts of the pupils did not amount to discrimination, and that the . .
Cited – Pearce v Mayfield School CA 31-Jul-2001
The claimant teacher was a lesbian. She complained that her school in failed to protect her against abuse from pupils for her lesbianism. She appealed against a decision that the acts of the pupils did not amount to discrimination, and that the . .
Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
Cited – In re A (A Minor) FD 8-Jul-2011
An application was made in care proceedings for an order restricting publication of information about the family after the deaths of two siblings of the child subject to the application. The Sun and a local newspaper had already published stories . .
Cited – A v P (Surrogacy: Parental Order: Death of Applicant) FD 8-Jul-2011
M applied for a parental order under the 2008 Act. The child had been born through a surrogacy arrangement in India, which was lawful there, but would have been unlawful here. The clinic could not guarantee a biological relationship with the child. . .
Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Cited – Salvesen v Riddell and Another; The Lord Advocate intervening (Scotland) SC 24-Apr-2013
The appellant owned farmland tenanted by a limited partnership. One partner gave notice and the remaining partners indicated a claim for a new tenancy. He was prevented from recovering possession by section 72 of the 2003 Act. Though his claim had . .
Cited – Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales) SC 9-Feb-2015
The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered.
Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence . .
Cited – T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
T and JB, asserted that the reference in certificates issued by the state to cautions given to them violated their right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the Convention. T further claims that the obligation cast upon him to . .
Cited – Hand and Another v George ChD 17-Mar-2017
Adopted grandchildren entitled to succession
The court was asked whether the adopted children whose adopting father, the son of the testator, were grandchildren of the testator for the purposes of his will.
Held: The claim succeeded. The defendants, the other beneficiaries were not . .
Cited – Brewster, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) SC 8-Feb-2017
Survivor of unmarried partner entitled to pension
The claimant appealed against the rejection of her claim to the survivor’s pension after the death of her longstanding partner, even though they had not been married. The rules said that she had to have been nominated by her partner, but he had not . .
Cited – McCann v The State Hospitals Board for Scotland SC 11-Apr-2017
A challenge by request for judicial review to the legality of the comprehensive ban on smoking at the State Hospital at Carstairs which the State Hospitals Board adopted. The appellant, a detained patient, did not challenge the ban on smoking . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
Cited – DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-May-2019
Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory.
Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Adoption, Wills and Probate

Leading Case

Updated: 07 February 2022; Ref: scu.164889

Re H (Adoption: Disclosure of Information ): 1995

An application was made by the sister of an adopted child for disclosure of the records held in order to allow her to make contact and to warn her of the fact that she might have an inherited genetic disease.
Held: The jurisdiction to grant such an order ‘should be exercised very sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances.’ and ‘Mr Blake, for the Registrar General, contends that as a matter of public policy the discretion should be exercised very sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances. He prays in aid of his submission the decision of His Honour Judge Blagden almost 40 years ago and the cautious language with which Judge Blagden acceded to the application in circumstances which were clearly exceptional.
Mr McFarlane, for NORCAP [the agency seeking the order], submits that had Parliament intended that the discretion should only be exercised very sparingly, and in exceptional circumstances, it would surely have so stated. In the absence of any statutory words Mr McFarlane submits that the burden upon the applicant should be no heavier than the ordinary burden to show cause by establishing a case of sufficient weight and justification so as to persuade the judge of the reasonableness of the order sought.
Of the rival submissions I prefer that of Mr McFarlane. Since Judge Blagden considered the parallel section in an earlier statute, attitudes to adoption, its consequences, and the importance of the biological origin and the psychological attachments have changed profoundly.’

Judges:

Thorpe J

Citations:

[1995] 1 FLR 236

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976 50(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lawson v Registrar General 1956
An application was made for disclosure by the Registrar of his records so that an adopted child could be contacted and informed of a significant legacy to which she would be entitled.
Held: Disclosure of such records was severely restricted, . .

Cited by:

Cited – In Re L (a Minor) (Adoption: Disclosure of Information) CA 12-Dec-1996
A request was made for an order that the Registrar General should provide information from his registers and records to enable a registered charity called the Post Adoption Centre to trace the applicant’s adopted daughter P, who had been made the . .
Cited – X (Adopted Child: Access To Court File) FC 9-Sep-2014
The applicant’s father had been adopted. Both he and the adopting parents had since died. The applicant now sought disclosure of the records to reveal her the court record of her father’s adoption order.
Held: The order should be made. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Information

Updated: 02 February 2022; Ref: scu.230136

TY (Overseas Adoptions – Certificates of Eligibility): UTIAC 12 Apr 2018

In cases where an adoption is not recognised by the law of the United Kingdom :
(i) The Tribunal should be aware of the underlying legal process in each part of the Kingdom by which a Certificate of Eligibility is issued.
(ii) The Certificate of Eligibility is the definitive outcome of the fact-finding and assessment that underlies it.
(iii) Whilst there is no exact correlation between the requirements that are to be met in the law of adoption and the requirements to be met under the Immigration Rules in order for a minor to be admitted for the purposes of adoption, they ought properly to be seen as a unified whole where each plays its part in determining whether entry clearance should be granted.
(iv) The Certificate of Eligibility is capable of informing the decision to be made on the application for entry clearance. In particular, the Immigration and Asylum Chamber should be slow to depart from the underlying circumstances (insofar as they can reasonably be ascertained) which are the subject-matter of the Certificate of Eligibility.

Citations:

[2018] UKUT 197 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Adoption

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.628721

Re RA (Baby Relinquished for Adoption): FC 14 Oct 2016

Applications concerning RA, namely: i) An application for an adoption order issued by his current carers: ii) An application issued by RA’s maternal grandmother for leave to make an application for a Child Arrangements Order, and if granted, for a Child Arrangements Order; and further for leave to remove RA from the jurisdiction to reside with her, her husband, and an aunt (all in the same household) at their home in Latvia.
Further:
iii) Following the hearing of the applications listed above, and following the circulation of the draft judgment, but before the judgment was formally handed down, an application was issued by RA’s birth parents for leave to oppose the adoption application.

Judges:

Cobb J

Citations:

[2016] EWFC 47, [2017] 2 FLR 1271

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.570452

T and Another v OCC and Another: FD 13 May 2010

Application by two women M and T to adopt a girl C who is 11 years old. The case raises three issues requiring determination by the court: first, whether M is to be regarded as the mother of C by reason of an adoption order made in Nicaragua; secondly whether M and T are to be regarded as a couple within the meaning of Section 50 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 (the 2002 Act); and thirdly whether adoption is justified by the criteria of Section 1 of the 2002 Act.

Mr Justice Hedley
[2010] EWHC 964 (Fam), [2011] 1 FLR 1487, [2011] Fam Law 337
Bailii
England and Wales

Adoption

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.424940