Legal case

Re B (Post-Adoption Contact)

[2019] EWCA Civ 29 · Court of Appeal

Ask the Adoptee Rights Assistant
Adoptee Rights Assistant

Please leave out names and identifying details.

Re B (Post-Adoption Contact)

[2019] EWCA Civ 29 · Court of Appeal

What happened: A child's birth parents sought an order for direct contact after adoption. They appealed when the court refused to require that contact. The case examined the court's powers to order continuing contact and the weight given to the prospective adopters' position, alongside the evidence about this particular child's needs.

What the court decided: The Court of Appeal dismissed the parents' appeal. It described an order imposing contact against adopters' wishes as extremely unusual. The decision did not create a blanket prohibition on contact; it addressed whether the court should require it in the circumstances before it.

Why it matters to adoptees: For adoptees asking why face-to-face relationships with family were not maintained, the case explains a significant legal obstacle. A relationship can matter to an adopted person without the court having ordered adults to sustain it during childhood. It is also important to distinguish contact after adoption from the earlier decisions about preserving relationships when adoption is being planned. Later cases in this database examine those earlier decisions, including sibling contact.

Later context checked; not exhaustive

Read with Re R and C (2024), paragraph 68, and Re S (2025), paragraphs 74–80, on planning contact before adoption.

Limitations: Concerns contact after adoption. It must not be treated as a blanket rule against sibling contact or confused with planning contact at the placement stage.

Case details and sources

Adoptee involvement: Child’s interests represented through a guardian; not an adult adoptee’s own application.

Remedy sought: Appeal dismissed.

Legal route: Appeal concerning section 51A contact

Judgments in this case

  • [2019] EWCA Civ 29 · Court of Appeal · 2019 · Judgment

Sources checked

Review scope: Official outcome and contact reasoning reviewed alongside the 2024 and 2025 judgments. No exhaustive citator check.

Human verification pending. Entry: CASE-NEW-006.

Link to this case

Browse all cases · Suggest a correction to this entry