header-logo header-logo

20 September 2007
Issue: 7289 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

FAMILY LAW

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

The Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002), ss 1(1) and (7), apply only to decisions under ACA 2002 and do not include coming to a decision about granting leave in any other circumstances, including decisions about granting leave in proceedings under the Children Act 1989.

An application for leave to defend adoption proceedings under ACA 2002, s 47(5) involves a two-stage process: (i) the court has to be satisfied, on the facts of the case, that there has been a change in circumstances within s 47(7), and if there has been no change in circumstances, the application must fail; (ii) if there has been a change in circumstances, the court has a discretion to permit the parents to defend the adoption proceedings. 

The decision whether or not to grant leave is governed by ACA 2002, s 1, and the paramount consideration for the court must be the child’s welfare throughout his life. When deciding either limb, the judge has a discretion whether or not to hear oral evidence.

It is not necessary for the judge to conduct a full welfare hearing unless the issues which arise for decision positively require one, or require oral evidence in one or more particular respects.

Issue: 7289 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll