Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal over power of court to revoke adoption orders

The appeal arose from an application to revoke an adoption order in respect of two children, X and Y. The application was made by their adoptive mother, AM, and supported by both children and their birth mother, BM.

The background to the case was that X and Y were placed for adoption with AM in August 2012, when they were 5 and 4 years old respectively.

The children had previously spent a prolonged period in foster care during which they had significant contact with their birth mother, BM.

The Supreme Court noted that the children “did not settle well”, and had asked for continuing contact with their birth mother. AM agreed that the children should spend time with BM and the extended birth family.

In 2017-19, X expressed a wish to live with BM whilst Y wanted to remain with AM. In 2020, during the Covid lockdown, AM allowed BM and BM’s youngest children to move in for a period to live with her in the adoptive home to help BM escape from an abusive relationship.

However, In June 2021, the relationship between AM and BM broke down.

In August 2021, X and Y left AM’s home and moved to live with BM. At this point, both children said they wanted to live with BM.

In May 2022, X, who had by then been introduced to her birth father, moved to live with him.

The Supreme Court observed that “several changes ensued”. Since August 2021, Y remained fairly settled with BM. X changed her position; in February 2023 she wanted to live with her birth father and then in May 2023 she moved to live with BM.

In February 2023, the local authority issued care proceedings to regulate their existing placements.

In Re X and Y (Revocation of Adoption Orders) [2024], AM made an application to revoke the adoption orders in respect of the children she had adopted a decade before.

In the High Court, Mrs Justice Lieven declined to invoke the inherent jurisdiction and refused the application. The decision was made on the basis that there was a pre-existing statutory scheme for revocation of adoption orders, albeit limited to cases of legitimisation, and thus she determined that the inherent jurisdiction could not be used as a springboard to fill gap in the legislation (the Adoption and Children Act 2002).

The Court of Appeal, consisting of Sir Andrew McFarlane, Lord Justice Peter Jackson and Lord Justice Phillips, upheld the decision and dismissed AM’s appeal. It found that courts have no power to rescind adoption orders on welfare grounds as Parliament intended such orders to be final.

However, this week (28 July), permission to appeal was granted by Lord Briggs, Lord Leggatt and Lord Stephens in the Supreme Court.

Lottie Winson

See also: The Court of Appeal on revocation of adoption orders - Catherine Ellis considers the implications of the ruling in Re X&Y on the High Court’s ability to revoke adoption orders.