Re J (Adoption: Appeal)
[2018] EWFC 8 · Family Court
What happened: A birth father challenged a stepparent adoption obtained through deception about his identity. The inaccurate account had kept him out of the process and prevented proper consideration of the child's paternal family relationships. He sought permission to appeal even though the normal deadline had passed.
What the court decided: The court allowed the late appeal and set aside the adoption order. The deception and resulting unfairness were central to the outcome. This was a correction of an adoption decision reached through a seriously defective process, rather than cancellation of a valid order merely because someone later wanted a different family arrangement.
Why it matters to adoptees: Information about a child's origins can affect who is heard, which relationships are considered and how the lifelong consequences of adoption are assessed. This case demonstrates that false information about parentage is not necessarily a peripheral paperwork problem. It can undermine the decision itself. For adoptees reading their records, it is also a reminder to distinguish an absence of involvement from evidence that a parent knew about and accepted the adoption.
Review limitations recorded
Read alongside [2026] UKSC 13: appeal powers are distinct from an inherent power to revoke a valid order on welfare grounds.
Limitations: An appeal addressing deception and procedural unfairness, not a general power to reverse adoption following reunion.
Case details and sources
Adoptee involvement: Application brought by the birth father concerning a child.
Remedy sought: Adoption order(s) set aside on appeal.
Legal route: Appeal against completed adoption order(s)
Judgments in this case
- [2018] EWFC 8 · Family Court · 2018 · Judgment
Sources checked
- Judgment source (opens in a new tab)
Paragraphs 1–4 and 27–38 · Judgment reproduction - Current distinction between appeal and revocation (opens in a new tab)
Paragraphs 78–81 · Later judgment
Review scope: Judgment reproduction checked for facts and outcome; late-appeal route cross-checked against [2026] UKSC 13 paragraph 78. No exhaustive later treatment review.
Human verification pending. Entry: CASE-NEW-028.