JK and PK against EM and TM re N (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2026] SACCIV 16 (17 February 2026)

JK and PK against EM and TM re N (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2026] SACCIV 16 (17 February 2026)

The sheriff correctly identified and applied the statutory test under section 31(3)(d), conducted a holistic evaluation of all options, and determined that the welfare of the child required dispensing with parental consent for adoption. The interference with parental rights was necessary and proportionate, and the decision was compatible with Article 8 ECHR. The sheriff's refusal to order post-adoption contact was justified by the children's views, lack of contact for a decade, and ongoing sibling contact outside the process.

Citation
[2026] SACCIV 16
Parties
Petitioner/respondent: JK; Petitioner/respondent: PK; Respondent/appellant: EM; Respondent/appellant: TM
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Adoption Petition Appeal / Sheriff Appeal Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal refused
Legal Topics
Adoption, Dispensing With Parental Consent, Child Welfare, Post Adoption Contact
Family Law Child Law Adoption Dispensing With Parental Consent Child Welfare 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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JK

Petitioner/respondent

PK

Petitioner/respondent

EM

Respondent/appellant

TM

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Adoption Petition Appeal / Sheriff Appeal Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in dispensing with parental consent for adoption under section 31(3)(d) of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff applied the correct legal test of necessity and proportionality
  3. 3 Whether the sheriff failed to resolve material factual issues

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff correctly identified and applied the statutory test under section 31(3)(d), conducted a holistic evaluation of all options, and determined that the welfare of the child required dispensing with parental consent for adoption. The interference with parental rights was necessary and proportionate, and the decision was compatible with Article 8 ECHR. The sheriff's refusal to order post-adoption contact was justified by the children's views, lack of contact for a decade, and ongoing sibling contact outside the process.

Court Disposition

appeal refused

Orders

  • Adoption order affirmed; parental consent dispensed with under section 31(3)(d) of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007
  • No order for post-adoption contact