Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Spotlight
A day in the life Of...
Rebecca Delaney
Rebecca Delaney
Director & Partner
Read on
Adoption in 2014
Date:5 MAR 2014

Lucy Sprinz, Barrister, One Garden Court

Since the Supreme Court decision in Re B (Care Proceedings: Appeal) [2013] UKSC 33, [2013] 2 FLR 1075 there have been a raft of Court of Appeal decisions stressing that orders contemplating non-consensual adoption are a measure of last resort and emphasising the need for clear and balanced analysis in the evidence provided by local authorities and children's guardians and in the judgments of the court.

This article will consider Re V (Long-Term Fostering or Adoption) [2013] EWCA Civ 913, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), K v London Borough of Brent [2013] EWCA Civ 926, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), Re G (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 965, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming), Re P (Care Proceedings: Balancing Exercise) [2013] EWCA Civ 963, Re B-S (Adoption: Application of s 47(5)) [2013] EWCA Civ 1146, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming) and Re W (Care Proceedings: Welfare Evaluation) [2013] EWCA Civ 1227, [2014] 1 FLR (forthcoming).

It will analyse why such a high volume of judgments re-stating law that should already be well known have been given recently, what those cases mean for practitioners and the courts, and will consider how practicable the requirements established by those cases are within the current political climate of cuts.

The full version of this article appears in the February 2014 issue of Family Law.

Categories:
Articles