The claimants complained of the respondent’s decision to suspend temporarily but without notice all further inter-country adoptions from Cambodia.
Held: There were proper concerns about a major humanitarian crisis for orphaned children and for child trafficking. This country had not been alone in suspending adoptions. The respondent did have power to withhold certificates of suitability. The decision was in conformity with the legislation, and was a proportionate and rational response in Human Rights terms. The discretion had been properly exercised.
Judges:
Munby J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 1378 (Admin), Times 12-Aug-2005
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Re M (Adoption: International Adoption Trade) FD 7-Mar-2003
A baby was for all practical purposes waved through immigration control because it had been adopted, with judicial sanction, in the United States of America and the adoption was accordingly recognised in this country. The adoption was a disaster for . .
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 – Pini and others v Romania ECHR 2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Adoption
Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.229293
