W (A Child), Re [2017] EWHC 829 (Fam) (06 March 2017)

W (A Child), Re [2017] EWHC 829 (Fam) (06 March 2017)

The court held that, despite the father's impressive parenting and the failings of the local authority, the delay in proceedings and W's secure attachment to her prospective adopters meant that her welfare throughout life required the making of an adoption order. The exceptional threshold for non-consensual adoption was met due to the determinative effect of delay and the risk of harm in disrupting W's established placement. The local authority was granted leave to withdraw its care and placement applications as there was no longer any basis for public law intervention.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 829 (Fam)
Parties
Applicants (prospective Adopters): Mr and Mrs A; Local Authority: Brighton and Hove City Council; Respondent (father): W's father; Respondent (mother): W's mother; Intervener (sibling): X (W's sister); Subject Child: W (by her children's guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Adoption and Care Proceedings / Final Judgment After Rehearing Following Court of Appeal Remittal
Outcome
Adoption order granted to Mr and Mrs A; local authority granted leave to withdraw care and placement applications.
Legal Topics
Adoption, Care Orders, Parental Consent, Article 8 ECHR, Welfare of the Child, Delay in Proceedings, Threshold Criteria, Expert Evidence, Proportionality, Withdrawal of Proceedings
Family Law Child Law Human Rights Adoption Care Orders Parental Consent Article 8 ECHR Welfare of the Child +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr and Mrs A

Applicants (prospective Adopters)

Brighton and Hove City Council

Local Authority

W's father

Respondent (father)

W's mother

Respondent (mother)

X (W's sister)

Intervener (sibling)

W (by her children's guardian)

Subject Child

Procedural Posture

Adoption and Care Proceedings / Final Judgment After Rehearing Following Court of Appeal Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant adoption order to prospective adopters or return child to birth father
  2. 2 Whether to dispense with parental consent under Adoption and Children Act 2002
  3. 3 Proper application of welfare and proportionality principles in light of delay and child's attachments

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, despite the father's impressive parenting and the failings of the local authority, the delay in proceedings and W's secure attachment to her prospective adopters meant that her welfare throughout life required the making of an adoption order. The exceptional threshold for non-consensual adoption was met due to the determinative effect of delay and the risk of harm in disrupting W's established placement. The local authority was granted leave to withdraw its care and placement applications as there was no longer any basis for public law intervention.

Court Disposition

Adoption order granted to Mr and Mrs A; local authority granted leave to withdraw care and placement applications.

Orders

  • Adoption order in favour of Mr and Mrs A for W
  • Dispensation with parental consent under Adoption and Children Act 2002