Re K (Adoption and Wardship)
[1997] 2 FLR 221 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
What happened: An English adoption case concerning a child from Bosnia went ahead without the child's extended family and state appointed guardian being properly notified. The resulting challenge concerned who had been excluded from the process and whether the adoption had been decided fairly. The case is recorded here through the Supreme Court's later account of it.
What the court decided: The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal against the adoption order because of serious failures of notice and fairness. In X and Y in 2026, the Supreme Court explained that this was an exercise of appeal powers, rather than a free-standing power to revoke a valid adoption because of later events.
Why it matters to adoptees: The people missing from an adoption process may also represent family connections, information and possible care arrangements missing from the child's future. This case shows why notifying relevant family members and guardians is more than an administrative formality. It is an example of a challenge to serious defects in the original proceedings, not a promise that an adoptee can reopen any historic adoption where relatives were not involved.
Considered in a later judgment
X and Y (2026), paragraphs 82, treats Re K as an appeal, not inherent revocation.
Limitations: This was an appeal case, not a general power to reopen historic adoptions.
Case details and sources
Adoptee involvement: Child was the subject of proceedings; no direct position recorded in this entry.
Remedy sought: Set aside adoption order
Legal route: Appeal out of time
Judgments in this case
- [1997] 2 FLR 221 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division) · 1997 · Judgment
Sources checked
- X and Y (2026): discussion of Re K (opens in a new tab)
paragraph 82 · Later judgment
Review scope: Existing website summary checked against the Supreme Court’s account in X and Y (2026). Original 1997 judgment not freshly reviewed.
Human verification pending. Entry: CASE-WEB-001.