Adoption - 1930- 1959

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 130,000 case listings, and over 95,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 4 cases, and was prepared on 25 August 2008.

Skinner -v- Carter [1948] Ch 387
1948 Lord Greene MR	Adoption	Casemap 1 Citers
	An adoption order alters the status of the child concerned, who is the person primarily affected and interested. Consequently, in any proceedings for the revocation or annulment of an adoption order, the child must be represented.

J and J -v- C's Tutor 1948 SC 636
1948	Scotland, Adoption	1 Citers
	Adoptive parents tried to reduce an adoption order. They asserted an essential error induced by innocent misrepresentations made by those acting for the natural mother; it was averred by the pursuers that they had been incorrectly assured that a satisfactory medical report existed in relation to the child. The child had suffered brain injury at birth. Secondly, they contended that statutory requiremnts had not been carried out; the adoption petition was presented less than three months from the date when the child was placed in the care of the adoptive parents, contrary to the Act. Held: Adoption involves unpredictable risks as to the development of the child, and that therefore there should be no possibility of going back. Moreover, adoption affects status in a peculiarly fundamental manner; it creates a relationship whose paradigm is the relationship of natural parent and natural child, a relationship which, apart from the statutory possibility of adoption, is obviously wholly irrevocable and unbreakable. The Act "made a serious invasion upon the common law by introducing a novel institution which cannot easily be fitted into its setting". An adoption order is sui generis; consequently the inherent power of the Court of Session to reduce decrees in absence and in foro should not apply. Essential error was not a valid ground for reduction of an adoption order.
	Statute References omitted

Rex -v- Leeds City Justices, ex parte Gilmartin [1951] CLY 1629
1951	Adoption	Casemap 1 Citers

Lawson -v- Registrar General (1956) 105 LJ 204
1956	Adoption	Casemap 1 Citers
	An application was made for disclosure by the Registrar of his records so that an adopted child could be contacted and informed of a significant legacy to which she would be entitled. Held: Disclosure of such records was severely restricted, but could be made where it would be in the child's best interests. This would be one such category of case.