M (A Child) (Placement Order), Re

M (A Child) (Placement Order), Re

The appeal was dismissed because the judge was entitled to conclude that the plan to place M with the aunt and uncle was uncertain, involved unacceptable delay, and was not realistically achievable within M’s timescales. The judge properly applied the welfare checklists, balanced the competing factors, and found that adoption was necessary and proportionate to meet M’s welfare needs. Further delay for an uncertain outcome was contrary to M’s best interests.

Parties
Appellant: Aunt and Uncle; 1st Respondent: Local Authority; 2nd Respondent: Mother; 3rd Respondent: Father; 4th Respondent: Child's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Placement Order From Family Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Placement Order, Adoption, Delay in Proceedings, International Placement, Welfare Checklist, Adjournment
Family Law Child Law Care Proceedings Placement Order Adoption Delay in Proceedings International Placement Welfare Checklist +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aunt and Uncle

Appellant

Local Authority

1st Respondent

Mother

2nd Respondent

Father

3rd Respondent

Child's Guardian

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Placement Order From Family Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing an adjournment for further assessment of the aunt and uncle as carers for M
  2. 2 Whether the judge properly applied the welfare checklists under the Children Act 1989 and Adoption and Children Act 2002
  3. 3 Whether the plan for placement with the aunt and uncle was realistically achievable within M's timescales

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the judge was entitled to conclude that the plan to place M with the aunt and uncle was uncertain, involved unacceptable delay, and was not realistically achievable within M’s timescales. The judge properly applied the welfare checklists, balanced the competing factors, and found that adoption was necessary and proportionate to meet M’s welfare needs. Further delay for an uncertain outcome was contrary to M’s best interests.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Placement Order affirmed
  • No further adjournment for assessment of aunt and uncle