Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
CB v EB [2020] EWFC 72
(Family Court, Mostyn J, 16 November 2020)Financial Remedies – Consent order – Application for set aside – Property values left husband with lower sums than anticipated – FPR...
No right (as yet) to be married legally in a humanist ceremony: R (on the application of Harrison and others) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWHC 2096 (Admin)
Mary Welstead, CAP Fellow, Harvard Law School, Visiting Professor in Family Law, University of BuckinghamIn July 2020, six humanist couples brought an application for judicial review on the...
Controlling and coercive behaviour is gender and colour blind but how are courts meeting the challenge to protect victims
Maryam Syed, 7BRExamining the most recent caselaw in both family and criminal law jurisdictions this article discusses the prominent and still newly emerging issue of controlling and coercive domestic...
Roma families face disadvantage in child protection proceedings
Mary Marvel, Law for LifeWe have all become familiar with the discussion about structural racism in the UK, thanks to the excellent work of the Black Lives Matter movement. But it is less recognised...
The ‘Bank of Mum and Dad’ – obligations and scope for change
Helen Brander, Pump Court ChambersQuite unusually, two judgments of the High Court in 2020 have considered financial provision for adult children and when and how applications can be made. They come...
View all articles
Authors

Adoption in 2014

Sep 29, 2018, 19:24 PM
Slug : adoption-in-2014
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 5, 2014, 11:00 AM
Article ID : 104959

Lucy Sprinz, Barrister, One Garden Court

Since the Supreme Court decision in Re B (Care Proceedings: Appeal) [2013] UKSC 33, [2013] 2 FLR 1075 there have been a raft of Court of Appeal decisions stressing that orders contemplating non-consensual adoption are a measure of last resort and emphasising the need for clear and balanced analysis in the evidence provided by local authorities and children's guardians and in the judgments of the court.

This article will consider Re V (Long-Term Fostering or Adoption) [2013] EWCA Civ 913, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), K v London Borough of Brent [2013] EWCA Civ 926, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), Re G (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 965, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), Re P (Care Proceedings: Balancing Exercise) [2013] EWCA Civ 963, Re B-S (Adoption: Application of s 47(5)) [2013] EWCA Civ 1146, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming) and Re W (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 1227, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming).

It will analyse why such a high volume of judgments re-stating law that should already be well known have been given recently, what those cases mean for practitioners and the courts, and will consider how practicable the requirements established by those cases are within the current political climate of cuts.

The full version of this article appears in the February 2014 issue of Family Law.

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