header-logo header-logo

Child Law Update

26 July 2007 / Esther Maclachlan
Issue: 7283 / Categories: Features , Child law
printer mail-detail

LEAVE TO DEFEND ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS >>
EXPERT EVIDENCE >>
PERMISSION TO ADVERTISE >>

Leave to defend adoption proceedings

Re P (a child) (adoption order: leave to oppose making of adoption order) [2007] EWCA Civ 616, [2007] All ER (D) 334 (Jun)

The parents had a volatile relationship punctuated by serious incidents of violence inflicted by the father against the mother. The local authority commenced care proceedings and the child was removed from the parents’ care under an emergency protection order. A care order was made by Judge Corrie on 8 May 2006 following a fully contested substantive hearing.
The care plan was for adoption and a placement order was made on 28 June 2006. This was opposed by the parents and in making the order their consent was dispensed with. The child was placed with the applicants on 7 July 2006 and adoption proceedings are to be heard in August of this year.
The parents applied for leave to defend the adoption proceedings, submitting that they had addressed the deficiencies in their lives and parenting.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll