header-logo header-logo

11 June 2009
Issue: 7373 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Adoption row rumbles on

Official solicitor controversy could go to European Court of Human Rights

The controversy over the adoption of a three-year-old child with disabilities whose mother was judged to lack the intelligence to cope, could be referred to the European Court of Human Rights.

The woman, known as “Rachel” in newspaper reports and “RP” in the court report, has been backed by John Hemming, Liberal Democrat MP for Birmingham Yardley, who also acted, along with the woman’s brother, as her “McKenzie Friend” during the court hearing.

Hemming, who is campaigning for mother and child to be allowed to live together, came in for severe criticism by Lord Justice Wall at the hearing last year, in RP v Nottingham County Council [2008] EWCA Civ 462, over his allegation that the expert clinical psychologist was biased in favour of the local authority.

Wall LJ said: “I find it not only unacceptable but shocking, that a man in Mr Hemming’s position should feel able to make so serious an allegation without any evidence to support it.”

Rachel’s daughter was discharged from hospital into the care of foster parents, and has never been in the sole care of her mother. Rachel was represented at subsequent hearings by the official solicitor, on the recommendation of an independent clinical psychologist, owing to the difficulties she had in understanding information.

Rachel later argued that she was unaware that she was being represented by the official solicitor until after the placement order, however, Wall LJ judged“wholly untenable any suggestion that RP did not know that the Official Solicitor was acting on her behalf. The evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary”.

Elspeth Thomson, partner, David Gray solicitors and cochair of Resolution’s children’s committee, says: “In my experience the information the Official Solicitor gives to parents is good. I can’t see a situation where the European Court of Human Rights is going to say the Official Solicitor should not
be appointed to look after the interests of parents without mental capacity.”

Issue: 7373 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll