Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
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...
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION: Oxfordshire County Council v X, Y and J [2010] EWCA Civ 581

Sep 29, 2018, 17:55 PM
Slug : adoption-oxfordshire-county-council-v-x-y-and-j-2010-ewca-civ-581
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 3, 2010, 08:25 AM
Article ID : 91007

(Court of Appeal; Master of the Rolls, Moses and Munby LJJ; 27 May 2010)

The birth parents wished to be sent a photo annually of their child who they had given up for adoption. All other parties wished to permit the birth parents to view the photo at the local authority offices annually. The judge ruled in favour of the birth parents.

Applicable welfare checklist was that in the Children Act 1989 because the adoption order had already been made in respect of the child. The judge had failed to refer (as had counsel at first instance) to authorities stating that it is very rare to impose unwanted conditions on adoptive parents. The judge had considered the impact of possession of the photos on the likelihood of any interference with the adoption. In fact the judge should have been focusing on whether the adopters' fear of such interference was unreasonable in that it had no reasonable basis. To undermine the adopters' security was to harm the child's welfare. The mere fact that the judge came to a different conclusion to the adopters as to the significance of risk was no answer if the adopters' fears were reasonable.

Appeal allowed. Whether or not sending of such photos to adopters was usual practice, as the Official Solicitor claimed, imposing such a condition on adopters was not.

__________________________________________________________________

Family Law Reports

Family Law Reports are relied upon by the judiciary, barristers and solicitors and the reports are cited daily in court and in judgments.

They contain verbatim case reports of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, House of Lords and European courts case, and also includes practice directions, covering the whole range of family law, public and private child law.

 

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