JK and PK against EM and TM re D (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2026] SACCIV 15 (17 February 2026)

JK and PK against EM and TM re D (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2026] SACCIV 15 (17 February 2026)

The sheriff applied the correct legal test under section 31(3)(d) of the 2007 Act, properly considered all realistic alternatives to adoption, and concluded that nothing less than adoption would safeguard and promote the children's welfare throughout their lives. The sheriff's reasoning was adequate and sufficiently addressed the relevant legal and factual issues. The refusal to order post-adoption contact was justified given the children's ages, wishes, and circumstances.

Citation
[2026] SACCIV 15
Parties
Petitioner and Respondent: JK; Petitioner and Respondent: PK; Respondent and Appellant: EM; Respondent and Appellant: TM
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal (adoption Order) / Sheriff Appeal Court (civil) Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal refused; sheriff's decision affirmed.
Legal Topics
Adoption, Dispensing With Parental Consent, Welfare of the Child, Proportionality, Necessity Test, Post Adoption Contact
Family Law Child Law Adoption Dispensing With Parental Consent Welfare of the Child Proportionality Necessity Test Post Adoption Contact

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JK

Petitioner and Respondent

PK

Petitioner and Respondent

EM

Respondent and Appellant

TM

Respondent and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (adoption Order) / Sheriff Appeal Court (civil) Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff applied the correct legal test under section 31(3)(d) of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007 in dispensing with parental consent for adoption
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff adequately considered the merits and demerits of alternatives to adoption
  3. 3 Whether the sheriff's reasoning and findings were sufficient and adequately reasoned

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff applied the correct legal test under section 31(3)(d) of the 2007 Act, properly considered all realistic alternatives to adoption, and concluded that nothing less than adoption would safeguard and promote the children's welfare throughout their lives. The sheriff's reasoning was adequate and sufficiently addressed the relevant legal and factual issues. The refusal to order post-adoption contact was justified given the children's ages, wishes, and circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; sheriff's decision affirmed.

Orders

  • Adoption orders in respect of D (and N) affirmed; parental consent dispensed with under section 31(3)(d) of the 2007 Act.
  • No order for post-adoption contact.