Aberdeen City Council v. JM AND AL [2010] ScotSC 4 (23 September 2010)

Aberdeen City Council v. JM AND AL [2010] ScotSC 4 (23 September 2010)

The court found that both respondents were unreasonably withholding consent to freeing the child for adoption, applying an objective test. The evidence established that the child's primary attachment was to the prospective adopters, and that returning the child to the birth mother involved significant risks to his emotional welfare, with no guarantee of successful rehabilitation. The welfare of the child required a stable and settled family environment, which was provided by the prospective adopters. There was no better alternative to a freeing order, and the statutory requirements for dispensing with parental consent and freeing for adoption were met.

Citation
[2010] ScotSC 4
Parties
Petitioner: Aberdeen City Council; First Respondent: JM; Second Respondent: AL
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Petition for Freeing a Child for Adoption / Judgment After Evidential Hearing
Outcome
Petition granted; child declared free for adoption; supervision order revoked.
Legal Topics
Adoption, Parental Consent, Child Welfare, Attachment Theory, Supervision Orders
Family Law Child Law Adoption Parental Consent Child Welfare Attachment Theory Supervision Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aberdeen City Council

Petitioner

JM

First Respondent

AL

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Freeing a Child for Adoption / Judgment After Evidential Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are unreasonably withholding consent to freeing the child for adoption
  2. 2 Whether freeing the child for adoption is in the child's best interests and welfare

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both respondents were unreasonably withholding consent to freeing the child for adoption, applying an objective test. The evidence established that the child's primary attachment was to the prospective adopters, and that returning the child to the birth mother involved significant risks to his emotional welfare, with no guarantee of successful rehabilitation. The welfare of the child required a stable and settled family environment, which was provided by the prospective adopters. There was no better alternative to a freeing order, and the statutory requirements for dispensing with parental consent and freeing for adoption were met.

Court Disposition

Petition granted; child declared free for adoption; supervision order revoked.

Orders

  • The child, C, born 26 March 2007, is declared free for adoption.
  • The supervision order in respect of C is revoked.