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
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

PLACEMENT ORDER: Re F (Appeal From Placement Order) [2013] EWCA Civ 1277

Sep 29, 2018, 18:51 PM
Slug : placement-order-re-f-appeal-from-placement-order-2013-ewca-civ-1277
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 28, 2013, 06:39 AM
Article ID : 103919

(Court of Appeal, Rimer, Black, Kitchin LJJ, 23 October 2013)

The 4-year-old child was reported to be very troubled and in need of intensive therapy. The psychologist did not refer to her as unadoptable but reported that she would need a programme of therapeutic parenting before adoption could be considered. Nevertheless at a final hearing final care and placement orders were granted. The father's first appeal of the placement order was refused.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal the appeal was allowed. It was clear from the psychological evidence that it was impossible to tell whether adoption would be appropriate for the child until she had undertaken some therapy. At which point it would depend on how she had progressed and also what adopters were available at the time. On the totality of the evidence it was not established that the child's welfare throughout her life required adoption. It was wrong for the court to have granted a placement order.

 

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