V v [2005] JRC 016 (10 February 2005)
- Citation
- [2005] JRC 016
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Adoption Application / Application for Freeing Order Under Article 4(1)(b) of the Adoption (jersey) Law 1961
More details
- Posture
- Adoption Application / Application for Freeing Order Under Article 4(1)(b) of the Adoption (jersey) Law 1961
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Adoption is in the best interests of V, and the natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent. The court dispenses with the need for their consent and frees V for adoption by Mrs P.
Court disposition
application granted
Orders
- Consent of Mr and Mrs B dispensed with
- V declared free for adoption by Mrs P
02
Material facts
Parties
Health and Social Services Committee
ApplicantMr and Mrs B
Respondents Counsel: Mr HarrisV
Subject ChildMrs P
Prospective Adopter03
Procedural history
Posture
Adoption Application / Application for Freeing Order Under Article 4(1)(b) of the Adoption (jersey) Law 1961
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether adoption is in the best interests of the child V
- 02
Whether the natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding consent to adoption
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Adoption is in the best interests of V, who has lived with Mrs P for almost her entire life and wishes to be adopted by her. The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration.
- Respondent
- Mr and Mrs B do not consent to the adoption. Their instructions were unclear and sparse, but they are not willing to consent.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Adoption (Jersey) Law 1961 as amended in 1995
The first consideration is the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of the infant; the wishes of the child must be considered having regard to age and understanding.
- 02
Adoption (Jersey) Law 1961, Article 4
The court may dispense with parental consent if it is satisfied that the parent is being unreasonable in withholding consent.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Adoption is in the best interests of V, and the natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent. The court dispenses with the need for their consent and frees V for adoption by Mrs P.
Court disposition
application granted
- Consent of Mr and Mrs B dispensed with
- V declared free for adoption by Mrs P
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
judgment the bailiff: 1. This is an application by the Health and Social Services Committee for an order under Article 4 (1) (b) of the ( Adoption Jersey) Law 1961 , declaring a child, to whom we shall refer as V, free for adoption.
2. The history can be very shortly stated. V is the natural child of Mr and Mrs B, although she has never been cared for by them. At 4 days old she was made the subject of a place of safety order and was placed with foster parents. On 24 th September 1987, at the age of 6 weeks she was placed with different foster parents with whom she has remained ever since. Unfortunately those foster parents have recently divorced, but V remains living in what was the family home with her foster mother to whom we shall refer as Mrs P.
3. V has now reached the age of 17. She has been known by different names from those given her at birth and she wishes before she attains the age of majority in a few months' time to regularise her status as a member of the family with whom she has lived for practical purposes all her life.
4. The natural parents, Mr and Mrs B, were asked for their consent to this adoption. The initial response was to return the relevant form torn into a number of pieces with the word "No" written on them. Subsequently, Mr and Mrs B have been advised by counsel and we have been greatly assisted by Mr Harris who appeared on their behalf this morning.
5. Mr Harris told us very candidly that he had found it difficult to obtain instructions from Mr and Mrs B. Their instructions were unclear and sparse, although Mr Harris made it clear that they were not willing to consent to V's adoption.
6. The law which we have to apply is clear. An amendment to the 1961 Law in 1995 provides that the first consideration is the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of the infant. The law requires the Court to have due consideration to the wishes of the infant having regard to her age and understanding. V has very clearly expressed her wishes to be adopted by Mrs P in an affidavit which has been placed before us.
7. We have, therefore, to ask ourselves whether adoption is in the best interests of the child and whether the natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent. We have no hesitation whatsoever in concluding that adoption is in the best interests of V and that her natural parents are being unreasonable in withholding their consent. We, therefore, dispense with the need for the consent of Mr and Mrs B, and we free V for adoption by Mrs P. Authorities 4 Halsbury (1999 re-issue): Vol 6: pp 225-7; 229-30. 4 Halsbury (Re-issue): Vol 5 (2): paras 1068 - 1077. In re D (a Minor) (Adoption: Freeing Order) (1991) 1 FLR 48. In re B (an Infant) (7 th October 1992) Jersey Unreported; [1992/177]; [1992 JLR N.8]. In re T (an Infant) [1987-88 JLR 677]. Adoption (Jersey) Law, 1961 - 1995: Articles 4, 5 & 8. Page Last Updated: 27 Mar 2017 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.