FAS v Bradford Metropolitan District Council and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 05 October 2015 |
| Date | 05 October 2015 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Briggs, Lady Justice Macur, Lord Justice Sales
Where a court was considering a British citizen's application to adopt a foreign national, the test in section 1(2) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, by which the paramount consideration was the child's welfare throughout his life, required the court to take into account the practical benefits which would accrue to a foreign national from becoming a British citizen.
Even when the child was in the United Kingdom in violation of immigration control, if his welfare was best promoted by his adoption by a British citizen, as a consequence of which he would automatically acquire British citizenship, the court should ordinarily make the adoption order sought.
The Court of Appeal so stated, when dismissing on different grounds the appeal of the claimant, FAS, against the refusal of Mr Justice MostynUNK ([2015] EWHC 622 (Fam)) to make an adoption order in her favour in respect of MW, a Pakistani national now aged 18, who was a first cousin once remo ved to the claimant.
The local authority, Bradford Metropolitan District Council, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department opposed the making of an adoption order.
Mr Matthew Rudd for the claimant; Mr Paul Greatorex for the Home Secretary. The local authority did not appear and was not represented.
LORD JUSTICE SALES said that MW's father had applied to enter the UK for a family visit although the judge had found that in fact he had brought MW for adoption. There were strict conditions under the 2002 act and regulations where such a course was proposed and it was a criminal off ence under section 83(7) of the act to bring in a child for adoption in breach of those conditions. Despite questionable and suspicious aspects of the claimant's evidence the judge had not found her guilty of culpable participation in that plan and he had not separately considered MW's culpability.
In interpreting section 1(2) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, the judge had construed the new formula of the child's welfare throughout his life as applying only to the long term emotional repercussions of an adoption order. He had disregarded other benefits accruing throughout the child's li fe after his childhood. In the judge's view, in parti-cular, section 1(2) was not applicable to any of the long term benefits associated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stories from the Negative Space: United States v. Thind and the Narrative of (non)whiteness
...Eric Lichtblau, Crimes Against Muslim Americans and Mosques Rise Sharply, N.Y. Times (Dec. 17, 2015), https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/us/politics/crimes-against-muslim-americans-and-mosques-rise-sharply.html.6. See, e.g., Neil Vigdor, College Student Charged in Arson at Texas Synagogue, ......
-
The New Redeemers
...(Stone Mountain, Georgia); Daniel Victor, New Orleans City Council Votes to Remove Confederate Monuments, N.Y. Times (Dec. 17, 2015), https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/us/new-orleans-city-counil-confederate-monuments-vote.html (New Orleans, Louisiana). 85. See Berkowitz & Blanco, supra not......
-
How Devolved Is Too Devolved?: a Comparative Analysis Examining the Allocation of Power Between State and Local Government Through the Lens of the Confederate Monument Controversy
...that we move quickly and quietly.'").93. Daniel Victor, New Orleans City Council Votes to Remove Confederate Monuments, N.Y. Times (Dec. 17, 2015), https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/us/new-orleans-city-counil-confe derate -monuments-vote. html?_r=0.94. Id.95. Landrieu invoked a 1993 ordina......