header-logo header-logo

13 September 2024
Issue: 8085 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 13 September 2024

Adoption

Re M (a child) [2024] EWCA Civ 1000, [2024] All ER (D) 55 (Aug)

The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on the appellant’s appeal against the order of the previous judge who had refused the local authority’s (LA) application for a placement order in respect of a four-year-old child, ‘M’. The judge said he considered of the fact that M as a child in care could have been stigmatised and at increased risk of breakdown of long-term fostering placements. However, the fact that there was such a close bond between mother and daughter, it would have helped to make the foster placement stronger, and less likely to break down. The LA advanced three grounds of appeal and argued that the judge: (i) erred in peremptorily dismissing adoption as a realistic option for M; (ii) failed to sufficiently evaluate the realistic options; and (iii) his reasons were inadequate. The court held that it was difficult to comprehend how the judge so unhesitatingly reached the decision he did. The judgment lacked a rigorous

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll