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

T v K and others [2016] EWHC 2963 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 19:34 PM
Public law children – Adoption – Egyptian child abandoned– British applicant brought child to UK – Egyptian authorities opposed to UK adoption
An adoption order was made in respect of the 6-year-old Egyptian child who had been abandoned at birth.
Slug : t-v-k-and-others-2016-ewhc-2963-fam
Meta Title : T v K and others [2016] EWHC 2963 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Public law children – Adoption – Egyptian child abandoned– British applicant brought child to UK – Egyptian authorities opposed to UK adoption
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 30, 2016, 04:32 AM
Article ID : 113411

(Family Division, Russell J, 23 November 2016)

Public law children – Adoption – Egyptian child abandoned– British applicant brought child to UK – Egyptian authorities opposed to UK adoption

An adoption order was made in respect of the 6-year-old Egyptian child who had been abandoned at birth.

The now 6-year-old child was born in Egypt to unknown parents and was abandoned as a baby. The applicant was a British national working in Egypt at the time. A local orphanage placed the child with the applicant and her Egyptian husband. She had remained in her care ever since. The child was granted entry clearance to visit the UK but due to a number of factors including political instability and civil unrest in Egypt they had not returned.

The applicant applied for a British passport for the child and had notified the local authority of her presence. The relationship between the applicant and her husband broke down and he resumed a relationship with his previous wife who it appeared he remained married to. The local authority reports were positive about the applicant’s care of the child. She was reportedly well settled and attached to the applicant who was the only mother she had ever known.

The applicant applied for an adoption order, or alternatively, a residence order. The husband was opposed to the child remaining in the UK although he had no contact with her. The Egyptian authorities were granted permission to intervene and objected to an Egyptian child being adopted in the UK. Both the husband and the Egyptian authorities submitted that she should return to Egypt.

The proposition that the mother and child should return to Egypt was unrealistic. It would leave them stranded without support, accommodation or any financial provision in what was to both of them, in essence, an alien land. The advantages were illusory, for although the child would return to her country, culture, religion and heritage of birth and would remain in the care of her psychological mother and primary carer their situation would be so precarious as to undermine any such advantages. For her to return to Egypt and placed with alternative carers would have numerous disadvantages and involve a substantial risk to her long-term psychological welfare that would more likely than not lead to significant harm.

An adoption order would provide far greater security than a child arrangements order. Applying the welfare checklist and taking into account the advantages and disadvantages it was in the child’s best interests throughout her life for an adoption order to be made.



This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

Case No: LV173/13 & LV 14P 00401
Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 2963 (Fam)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN AND ADOPTION ACT 2002
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989
IN THE MATTER OF THE SENIOR COURTS ACT 1981
AND IN THE MATTER OF Z (A Child) (Believed to be born on 29th October 2010)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 23/11/2016

Before:


MS JUSTICE RUSSELL


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Between:


T
Applicant


and


K
1st Respondent 


and


Z
2nd Respondent


and


Liverpool City Council
3rd Respondent


and


The Egyptian Ministry of Social Solidarity
4th Respondent


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Ms Frances Heaton QC and Ms Kate Burnell (instructed by Morecrofts Solicitors) for the Applicant (T)
The 1st Respondent (K-in person by telephone)
Mr Karl Rowley QC (instructed by Susan Howarth & Company) for the 2nd Respondent (Z-the child)
Mr Clive Baker (instructed by LCC) for the 3rd Respondent (Local Authority)
Mr Henry Setright QC and Mr Michael Gration (instructed by Bindmans Solicitors) for the 4th Respondent (Egyptian Ministry of Social Solidarity)




Hearing dates: 30TH AUGUST TO 8TH SEPTEMBER 2016


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Judgment

T v K and others [2016] EWHC 2963 (Fam).rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Public Law Children
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from