The White Paper's recommendation that adoption should be based upon a clear and significant advantage to the child will continue to be played out through the courts. Margaret Richards examines trends in post-Children Act permanence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
A v Liverpool Corporation [1981] FLR 222.
2.
see also re T (A Minor) [1994] 1 FLR 103.
3.
In re M (Minor) (Care Order: 1 FLR 103 Threshold conditions) Family Law 501, 1994.
4.
see Jolly, Journal of Social Welfare Law299, 1994.
5.
Re C (A Minor) (Adopted Child: Contact) [1993] 2 FLR 431.
6.
Re E (A Minor) (Care Order: Contact) [1994] 1 FLR 146.
7.
see Dewar, Practitioners Child Law Bulletin20, 1994.
8.
Re P [1993] 2 FLR 742.
9.
Re J (Minors) (Care: Care Plan) [1994] 1 FLR 253.
10.
Re S (A Minor) (Access Application) [1991] 1 FLR 161.
11.
Re B (Minors) (Care: Contact: Local Authority's Plans) [1993] 1 FLR 543.
12.
Brasse Family Law 23, 1993.
13.
see 6 above.
14.
Re U (Application to Free for Adoption) [1993] 2 FLR 992.
15.
Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v E and others [1994] 1 FLR 568.
16.
Re H (A Minor) (Care or Residence Order) [1994] 2 FLR 80.
17.
Re T (A Minor) (Guardian ad Litem: Case Record) [1994] 1 FLR 632.
