R and C (Adoption or Fostering), Re
[2024] EWCA Civ 1302
K (Child: Placement options: Concurrent planning), Re
7 May 2024
[2024] EWFC 98 (B)
Family Court
Two kids needed new homes. The social workers wanted one adopted, the guardian wanted foster care. The judge chose foster care. The social workers appealed, but the higher court agreed with the judge, saying she made the right decision based on what was best for the kids.
Key Facts
- •Appeal concerning a District Judge's decision to prefer a guardian's recommendations over a social work team's recommendations regarding placement options for two siblings, K (7) and L (4).
- •Local authority's initial plan: Adoption for K with limited contact, Special Guardianship for L.
- •Amended plan: Concurrent plans for K – adoption and long-term foster care.
- •Mother opposed the plans and sought an adjournment.
- •Guardian supported the plan for L but opposed the plan for K.
- •Judge dismissed the mother's application for an adjournment, granted Special Guardianship Orders for L, and made no order on the adoption application for K, opting for foster care.
- •Local authority appealed, arguing the Judge's decision lacked reasoned comparison of placement options, flawed application of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 checklist, and erred in dismissing the possibility of a contact order with a placement order.
Legal Principles
Permission to appeal granted only if the appeal has a real prospect of success or there's a compelling reason.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, r 30.3(7)
Definition of 'real prospect of success': Realistic, not fanciful; doesn't equate to >50% chance.
AV v RM (appeal) [2012] 2 FLR 709
Appellate court's role: Assess the judge's decision's foundation and whether orders were necessary and proportionate.
Re N [2023] EWCA Civ 364
Appellate court intervenes only if the judge was wrong, considering the judge's advantages.
Re B (Care Proceedings: Appeal) [2013] UKSC 33; In re B; Piglowska v Piglowski [1999] UKHL 27
Adoption is a last resort, requiring high justification after analyzing alternatives.
Case law cited in judgment, section 16
Adoption is an interference with a child's right to family life, permissible only if necessary, proportionate, and lawful.
Sections 19 and 20
Courts should consider the broader social and professional context, but decide each case on its facts.
Section 22
Outcomes
Appeal refused.
The Judge's decision was properly founded on the evidence, considering necessity, proportionality, and legality. The local authority's arguments demonstrated a misunderstanding of the Judge's reasoning and the court's duties. The Judge was entitled to reach the conclusion she did.