Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
Unequal chances? Ethnic disproportionality in child welfare and family justice
Many have experienced their own Black Lives Matter moment in the last 12 months, a sharp realisation of entrenched prejudices and inequalities that still exist in our society.In the family justice...
Changes to the law on Domestic Abuse
Official statistics (ONS (2016), March 2015 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)) show that around 2 million people suffer from some form of domestic abuse each year in the UK. In...
Managing costs in complex children cases
In November 2020 Spice Girl Mel B was in the news, despairing about how the legal costs of trying to relocate her daughter Madison from the US to England were likely to bankrupt her, leading to her...
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION: Re PW (Adoption) [2011] EWHC 3793 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:29 PM
Slug : 2011EWHC3793Fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 23, 2012, 04:00 AM
Article ID : 97901

(Family Division; Parker J; 12 October 2011)

The 69-year-old woman was orphaned when she was 17 and the parents of her closest friend offered her a home and applied for an adoption order. The order was granted and the woman remained with the adoptive family until she was 23 when she left home and was married. She married in her adoptive name and her children have that name on their birth certificates. After her adoptive mother died the woman challenged the adoption order which she claimed should not have been made and had a devastating effect on her life. She claimed that her wishes and feelings were not ascertained prior to the order and that she felt pressurised and influenced by her adoptive parents who very much wished to adopt her to the extent that she felt unable to gainsay their wishes. The only available remedy was permission to appeal out of time. The adoption had provided considerable benefits and support for the woman and there were strong policy reasons why adoption orders should not be set aside. The court had to assume the order was validly made on a proper and appropriate basis under the law as it was at the time. There was no prospect of success on appeal and so no basis to grant an extension of time for permission to appeal. Application refused.

 

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from