Re BJU to be called B: Adoption Application Appeal - Welfare of Child Paramount
The High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by C and D, a married couple, against the lower court's decision to deny their application to adopt BJU, D's son from a previous relationship with E. E, the natural father, objected to the adoption. The High Court, Choo Han Teck J, allowed the appeal on 2013-07-19, finding that the adoption was in the best interests of the child, BJU, who is now 15 years old and has lived with C and D for most of his life.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Family
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding an adoption application. The High Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing the paramount importance of the child's welfare.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
| E | Respondent | Individual | E of Independent Practitioner | ||
| C | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won | |
| Re BJU to be called B | Other | Individual |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Choo Han Teck | J | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| V Ramakrishnan | V Ramakrishnan & Co |
| E | Independent Practitioner |
4. Facts
- C and D, husband and wife, sought to adopt BJU, D's son from a previous relationship.
- E, the natural father, objected to the adoption.
- E had ceased having access to B since 2008 and stopped paying maintenance.
- E was serving a six-year prison sentence for a drug offense.
- BJU was 15 years old at the time of the appeal.
- BJU expressed happiness with his life with C and D and was not keen to see E.
- The Senior Child Welfare Officer supported the adoption application.
5. Formal Citations
- Re BJU to be called B, Originating Summons No 170 of 2012 (Registrar's Appeal Subordinate Courts No 11 of 2013), [2013] SGHC 138
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| C and D married. | |
| C and D's son, F, was born. | |
| E ceased having access to B and stopped paying maintenance. | |
| C and D applied to adopt B as their son. | |
| Appeal adjourned for E to attend. | |
| Hearing resumed; E was not present. | |
| High Court allowed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Adoption
- Outcome: The court allowed the adoption, finding it to be in the child's best interest.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1952] 2 QB 561
- Dispensation of Parental Consent
- Outcome: The court dispensed with the natural father's consent under s 4(4)(c) of the Adoption of Children Act, finding that the child's welfare was paramount.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1952] 2 QB 561
8. Remedies Sought
- Adoption Order
- Dispensation of Consent of Natural Parent
9. Cause of Actions
- Adoption Application
10. Practice Areas
- Family Law
- Adoption
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hitchcock v WB and FEB and others | QB | Yes | [1952] 2 QB 561 | England and Wales | Cited regarding the principle that a parent's refusal to consent to adoption should not be whimsical, arbitrary, or in bad faith. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Adoption of Children Act (Cap 4, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Adoption
- Welfare of the Child
- Dispensation of Consent
- Paramountcy Principle
15.2 Keywords
- Adoption
- Child Welfare
- Family Law
- Singapore
- High Court
- Appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Adoptions | 95 |
| Family Law | 70 |
| Children's Welfare | 60 |
| Maintenance | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Family Law
- Adoption