S (A Child), Re No. 1

S (A Child), Re No. 1

The judge was entitled to conclude that S's welfare was better served by a special guardianship order rather than adoption, given S's ongoing relationship with her birth family, the mutual respect between the appellant and the mother, and the absence of compelling evidence that adoption was necessary to secure S's welfare. The judge did not err in her approach to the welfare checklist or in her treatment of the evidence. The appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: DO (Adopter); 1st Respondent: LP (Mother); 2nd Respondent: PH (Father); 3rd Respondent: Bury Metropolitan Borough Council; 4th Respondent: GN (The Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adoption, Special Guardianship, Parental Responsibility, Welfare of the Child, Dispensing With Parental Consent
Family Law Child Law Adoption Special Guardianship Parental Responsibility Welfare of the Child Dispensing With Parental Consent

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DO (Adopter)

Appellant

LP (Mother)

1st Respondent

PH (Father)

2nd Respondent

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council

3rd Respondent

GN (The Guardian)

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child S should be adopted by the appellant or placed under a special guardianship order
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in not making an adoption order
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to consider the welfare checklist and the evidence appropriately

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to conclude that S's welfare was better served by a special guardianship order rather than adoption, given S's ongoing relationship with her birth family, the mutual respect between the appellant and the mother, and the absence of compelling evidence that adoption was necessary to secure S's welfare. The judge did not err in her approach to the welfare checklist or in her treatment of the evidence. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Special guardianship order for S in favor of the appellant confirmed, subject to receipt of a local authority report under s.14A(8) and reconsideration by the trial judge.
  • Order under s.91(14) Children Act 1989 prohibiting further applications without leave of the court.