14 Dec 1992
MR C AND ANOTHER v. MR D AND ANOTHER
- Citation
- MR C AND ANOTHER v. MR D AND ANOTHER
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCAD3/1992
The District Judge's appointment of Mr D was indefensible because Mr D lacked the specialized qualifications, training and investigatory resources required by Rule 13 and the Second Schedule and because his business model of accepting payment from prospective adopters undermined and objectively vitiated the independence required of a guardian ad litem; accordingly Mr D was removed and the Director appointed as guardian ad litem and the court issued guidance restricting suitable appointees to adoption agencies or individuals with specialist child-related training backed by adequate organisatio…