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
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
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...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
View all articles
Authors

ADOPTION/IMMIGRATION: MN (India) v Entry Clearance Officer [2008] EWCA Civ 38

Sep 29, 2018, 16:13 PM
Slug : mn-india-v-entry-clearance-officer-2008-ewca-civ-38
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 11, 2008, 10:31 AM
Article ID : 85033

(Court of Appeal; Ward, Keene and Wilson LJJ; 5 February 2005)

The Indian child's natural father had died and the mother was ill; British citizens of Indian origin adopted the child under Indian law, taking on financial responsibility for her. Although the adoption was not valid in England the adoptive parents sought to bring the child to England as an adopted child. The entry clearance officer refused the application; the immigration judge dismissed the appeal, as did the tribunal.

The immigration judge had made no error of law in refusing entry clearance, notwithstanding the resultant interference in family life; the judge had been entitled to attach considerable weight to the fact that the adoptive parents could have sought leave for the child to enter for purpose of a UK adoption, but had chosen not to do so. None of the professional checks, required under English law as elementary to an analysis of whether a child's interests were served by living as an adopted child in the home of others, had been undertaken; such checks were regarded as necessary not only under English law, but also at international level.

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