In this case Janet Bazley KC instructed by Griffiths Robertson Solicitors acted for the Respondent Father. This case concerned an appeal by the Local Authority, supported by the Children’s Guardian, against a decision of HHJ Tolson KC, refusing a placement order in respect of a child of 11 months on the basis that it had not been established that “nothing else would do.”

The court determined that the judge had fallen into the error of using that slogan as a substitute for a proper welfare evaluation, whereas it comes in only as a proportionality cross-check. The judge had been wrong to elevate long-term foster care into something that “would do”, therefore ruling out adoption. The appeal was allowed and a placement order substituted on the basis that the child’s family relationships were not of such importance that they outweighed her prominent need to have a “lifelong family,” which could only be achieved through adoption.