P (A Child), Re
As of January 2015, the mother had not demonstrated a sufficient and sustainable change in circumstances to warrant permission to oppose the adoption order, and even if such change were established, the welfare evaluation would not justify disrupting the child's settled placement with the prospective adopter.
- Parties
- Appellant: Mother; 1st Respondent: Manchester City Council; 2nd Respondent: Children's Guardian
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 July 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Oppose Adoption Order
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Adoption, Leave to Oppose Adoption Order, Change of Circumstances, Child Welfare, Attachment and Status Quo
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mother
Appellant
Manchester City Council
1st Respondent
Children's Guardian
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Refusal of Permission to Oppose Adoption Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judge erred in concluding that the mother had not shown sufficient change in circumstances since the placement order to satisfy s47(7) Adoption and Children Act 2002
- 2 Whether the mother should have been granted permission to oppose the making of an adoption order for her child
Ratio Decidendi
As of January 2015, the mother had not demonstrated a sufficient and sustainable change in circumstances to warrant permission to oppose the adoption order, and even if such change were established, the welfare evaluation would not justify disrupting the child's settled placement with the prospective adopter.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Mother refused permission to oppose the adoption order
- Adoption order for child F may proceed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment