In this case, Pauffley J had to decide whether to revoke an adoption order that was made in 2004. That is a very unusual application to hear, and still more unusual to grant. The only successful applications I’m aware of before this were ones where the adoption order was made before an appeal could be heard and thus the revocation was just to restore the ‘status quo’ so that the appeal could be heard.
The major reported case was the one involving the Webster family, where adoption orders were made on the basis of physical injuries and a Court was later persuaded that the injury had been the result of scurvy, itself the result of a failure of a brand of formula milk to have sufficient vitamin C. The Court there, as a result of the passage of time and public policy issues declined to revoke the adoption orders.
View original post 1,570 more words