header-logo header-logo

13 January 2017
Issue: 7729 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family proceedings

Re N (A Child) (Recognition of foreign adoption) [2016] EWHC 3085 (Fam), [2016] All ER (D) 53 (Dec)

 

The Family Division granted the applicant’s applications for a declaration recognising her adoption of a child, N, in India, and for an adoption order in respect of N. The court held, among other things, that Re Valentine’s Settlement [1965] 2 All ER 226 remained good law and binding upon judges at first instance. Accordingly, recognition at common law of a foreign adoption, whether the question arose in a court or elsewhere, depended upon, and only upon, the four criteria identified in Re Valentine’s Settlement. Applying settled law, the court held that English law recognised N’s adoption by the applicant in India and that it was manifestly in N’s best interests, currently and throughout her life, that the adoption order be made.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll