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
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION: Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust v H [2006] UKHL 36

Sep 29, 2018, 17:12 PM
Slug : down-lisburn-health-and-social-services-trust-v-h-2006-ukhl-36
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 25, 2006, 08:40 AM
Article ID : 87419

(House of Lords; Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Carswell; 12 June 2006) [2006] FLR (forthcoming)

In a Northern Ireland case, the parents withheld their agreement to adoption, and the authority sought a freeing order. Prospective adopters had not been identified, and the parents required assurances that post-adoption contact would take place. Expert evidence supported post-adoption contact as being in the child's best interests. The court considered that the agreement of the parents should be dispensed with on the ground that it was being unreasonably withheld.

The majority of the House of Lords considered that the freeing order should stand, but Baroness Hale of Richmond delivered a dissenting judgment, expressing the view that that the judge had taken into account irrelevant matters; he should have considered the issue of post adoption contact as an important feature of the case.

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