P (A Child)

P (A Child)

The welfare of the children throughout their lives required adoption by Mr TMI, as it was the only means to formalise and consolidate the established family unit, confer full legal parental status, and reflect the children's wishes. The interference with the birth fathers' Art 8 rights was modest given their lack of involvement, and adoption was a proportionate and necessary measure. The first instance judge erred in applying an unduly high threshold and failing to evaluate the proportionality and the realities of the children's family life.

Parties
Applicant: Mr TMI; Subject Child: A (a child); Subject Child: D (a child); Supporter/consenter: Children's mother; Respondent: A's father (MP); Respondent: D's father (BZ)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Adoption (step Parent) / Appeal From Wrexham County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; adoption orders granted
Legal Topics
Step Parent Adoption, Dispensation of Parental Consent, Welfare of the Child, Parental Responsibility, Proportionality Under ECHR Article 8
Family Law Adoption Law Human Rights Law Step Parent Adoption Dispensation of Parental Consent Welfare of the Child Parental Responsibility Proportionality Under ECHR Article 8

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr TMI

Applicant

A (a child)

Subject Child

D (a child)

Subject Child

Children's mother

Supporter/consenter

A's father (MP)

Respondent

D's father (BZ)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Adoption (step Parent) / Appeal From Wrexham County Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the welfare of the children required dispensing with the birth father's consent to adoption under ACA 2002, s 52(1)(b)
  2. 2 Whether the judge at first instance misapplied the statutory test and proportionality analysis for step-parent adoption
  3. 3 Whether adoption was a proportionate and necessary interference with the Art 8 rights of the children and their birth fathers

Ratio Decidendi

The welfare of the children throughout their lives required adoption by Mr TMI, as it was the only means to formalise and consolidate the established family unit, confer full legal parental status, and reflect the children's wishes. The interference with the birth fathers' Art 8 rights was modest given their lack of involvement, and adoption was a proportionate and necessary measure. The first instance judge erred in applying an unduly high threshold and failing to evaluate the proportionality and the realities of the children's family life.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; adoption orders granted

Orders

  • Adoption orders made in favour of Mr TMI for both D and A, establishing him as their adoptive father.