A, B And C (Adoption: Notification of Fathers And Relatives)

A, B And C (Adoption: Notification of Fathers And Relatives)

The decision to notify fathers and/or relatives of a child's birth and proposed adoption is not governed by the welfare paramountcy principle but by a balancing of all relevant interests. Confidential relinquishment and fast-track adoption are lawful but exceptional; strong countervailing factors are required to justify withholding notification from fathers with parental responsibility or established family life. The mother's right to privacy is important but not absolute. The process must be urgent, thorough, and based on a critical assessment of all available information. In Case A, the judge erred by giving determinative weight to the mother's wishes without sufficient objective basis;...

Parties
Appellant: Appellant Child (Case A); Respondent: Respondent Local Authority (Case A); Appellant: Appellant Mother (Case B); Respondent: Respondent Local Authority (Case B); Appellant: Appellant Mother (Case C); Respondent: Respondent Local Authority (Case C); Respondent: Respondent Child by her Children’s Guardian (Case C)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from Family Court) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in Case A (father to be notified); appeals dismissed in Cases B and C (notification to proceed)
Legal Topics
Adoption—notification of Fathers and Relatives, Confidential Relinquishment of Children, Article 8 Echr—right to Family and Private Life, Procedural Fairness in Adoption, Welfare Paramountcy, Balancing Rights of Mother, Child, And Relatives
Family Law Adoption Law Child Law Adoption—notification of Fathers and Relatives Confidential Relinquishment of Children Article 8 Echr—right to Family and Private Life Procedural Fairness in Adoption Welfare Paramountcy +1 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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant Child (Case A)

Appellant

Respondent Local Authority (Case A)

Respondent

Appellant Mother (Case B)

Appellant

Respondent Local Authority (Case B)

Respondent

Appellant Mother (Case C)

Appellant

Respondent Local Authority (Case C)

Respondent

Respondent Child by her Children’s Guardian (Case C)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from Family Court) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether and when local authorities and courts must notify fathers and/or relatives of the birth and proposed adoption of a child where the mother seeks confidentiality
  2. 2 Whether the welfare paramountcy principle applies to notification decisions
  3. 3 How to balance the mother's right to privacy against the rights and interests of the child, father, and relatives

Ratio Decidendi

The decision to notify fathers and/or relatives of a child's birth and proposed adoption is not governed by the welfare paramountcy principle but by a balancing of all relevant interests. Confidential relinquishment and fast-track adoption are lawful but exceptional; strong countervailing factors are required to justify withholding notification from fathers with parental responsibility or established family life. The mother's right to privacy is important but not absolute. The process must be urgent, thorough, and based on a critical assessment of all available information. In Case A, the judge erred by giving determinative weight to the mother's wishes without sufficient objective basis;...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in Case A (father to be notified); appeals dismissed in Cases B and C (notification to proceed)

Orders

  • In Case A, the father is to be notified of the child's existence, with further consideration of wider family notification as appropriate.
  • In Case B, the local authority may notify the maternal grandparents and assess them as potential carers.