Re S (Children); Re S (A Child)
[2014] EWCA Civ 135 · Court of Appeal
What happened: A father opposed a plan for his daughter’s adoption because it would end her existing legal family relationships. After changes in his circumstances, he asked to be assessed as her carer in Norway. The court proceeded to make a placement order without that further assessment. He appealed and obtained reconsideration of the decision.
What the court decided: The Court of Appeal allowed his appeal because further assessment was needed and the reasons for making the placement order were inadequate. The later Supreme Court judgment records that reassessment and increased contact succeeded: the child had gone to live with her father under a child arrangements order. The Supreme Court proceedings concerned legal costs, not reversal of that family outcome.
Why it matters to adoptees: This is especially useful because the published case history goes beyond a successful appeal and records a different arrangement for the child’s upbringing. It demonstrates why an earlier negative assessment should not automatically close off further examination of a family option when circumstances change. It also records the financial difficulty of challenging decisions about family separation, without suggesting that a successful appeal guarantees reimbursement of legal costs.
Review limitations recorded
No exhaustive later treatment review; see source and review limitations.
Limitations: The 2014 outcome and subsequent placement are captured through the official 2015 Supreme Court account. The original Court of Appeal judgment has not been independently reviewed in full in this batch. Costs and welfare outcomes must be distinguished.
Case details and sources
Adoptee involvement: Proceedings concerned a child or children. This summary does not attribute personal views to them beyond the published judgment.
Remedy sought: Successful welfare appeal; later placement with father.
Legal route: Appeal against care and placement orders; subsequent costs appeal
Judgments in this case
- [2014] EWCA Civ 135 · Court of Appeal · 2014 · Judgment
- [2015] UKSC 20 · Supreme Court · 2015-03-25 · Subsequent costs appeal; records family outcome
Sources checked
- Later court account (opens in a new tab)
Paragraphs 1–10; costs determination later in judgment · Later judgment
Review scope: Official Supreme Court judgment checked for the earlier successful appeal and recorded placement with father. Linked Supreme Court judgment concerns costs; no claim of full original 2014 judgment review.
Human verification pending. Entry: CASE-NEW-041.