header-logo header-logo

23 March 2007 / John Mitchell
Issue: 7265 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family , Ancillary relief
printer mail-detail

Guardianship v adoption

John Mitchell compares recent developments in guardianship orders with the current rules on adoption

Since December 2005 courts have been able to make special guardianship orders (SGOs) under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), s 14A. These give former foster parents, relatives and others what the white paper, Adoption, A New Approach (2000) Cm 5017 described as “clear responsibility for all aspects of caring for a child” and a status greater than that provided by a residence order but less than adoption.

The Court of Appeal has recently provided guidance on how the new powers should be used. The SGO is intended to build what the white paper called “a legally secure, stable permanent placement”, in part by restricting the exercise of parental responsibility by the child’s parents and requiring them to obtain the leave of the court before applying for any s 8 order other than a residence order. A strong message from the Court of Appeal is that the issue of whether or not to make an SGO is of “fundamental importance”

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll