AX v BX and Others (Revocation of Adoption Order)
[2021] EWHC 1121 (Fam) · High Court, Family Division
What happened: Two adopted young people applied to end their adoptions after returning to their original maternal family. Both instructed their solicitor directly. A described distress about a legal identity that did not reflect her family life, brought into sharper focus by the birth of her own child. They were aged 18 and 16 by the judgment.
What the court decided: The High Court revoked both adoption orders in 2021. This restored their previous legal family relationships. However, the Court of Appeal held in X and Y in 2025 that AX v BX had been wrongly decided. The Supreme Court in 2026 rejected the inherent power relied upon to revoke valid adoption orders on welfare grounds.
Why it matters to adoptees: The judgment gives substantial space to the young people’s own accounts of identity, belonging and the consequences for the next generation. It records a successful historical application, while the later decisions show why that outcome cannot be presented as an available general route today.
Historical route rejected by X and Y
[2025] EWCA Civ 2 paragraph 68 held AX v BX wrongly decided; [2026] UKSC 13 confirms no inherent power to revoke valid adoption orders on welfare grounds.
Limitations: Distinct proceedings from X and Y, which later examined this authority. The historical revocation is preserved separately from rejection of its legal reasoning. No exhaustive later treatment review.
Case details and sources
Adoptee involvement: Both applied while under 18 and instructed their solicitor directly. A gave oral evidence; B’s views appear in her written statement. Ages 18 and 16 refer to the 2021 judgment, not commencement in February 2020.
Remedy sought: Adoption orders revoked in 2021; legal reasoning later rejected.
Legal route: Direct applications by adopted young people to revoke adoption orders
Judgments in this case
- [2021] EWHC 1121 (Fam) · High Court, Family Division · 2021-04-23 · Principal judgment
Sources checked
- Original judgment (opens in a new tab)
Paragraphs 1–14 and 25–31 · Judgment - Later Court of Appeal treatment (opens in a new tab)
Paragraphs 59 and 68 · Later judgment - Current Supreme Court authority (opens in a new tab)
Jurisdiction to revoke valid adoption orders · Later judgment
Review scope: Capture of facts, outcome and applicant role using listed sources. Distinct proceedings from X and Y, which later examined this authority. The historical revocation is preserved separately from rejection of its legal reasoning. No exhaustive later treatment review.
Human verification pending. Entry: CASE-NEW-051.