ADOPTED CHILD

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 152, 24 March 1944, Page 3

ADOPTED CHILD

Natural Mother Attempts

Recovery

A point of law which has arisen from the attempt of the natural parents of a girl aged 15 to regain custody of her from her grandmother, who had adopted her, has been decided by the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers). ’ The girl was born in 1928 when her mother was aged 18 and unmarried. sVitu tlie mother's consent the child was adopted bv the mother’s parents, an. order of adoption being made by a magistrate In. 1930. The following year the mother married. In 1935 the childs graudfa.ther died, and since then sjie has remained with iter grandmother, .who is n °w aged 7-1. In September. 1943, the childs mother and her husband applied to a magistrate for live adoption order made in 1930 to be cancelled and at the same time applied to Um for an adoption order in their favour. The sur vi vinpr adopting parent refused to consent and tlie magistrate would not. consider tlie application for cancellation of the previous order without such consent. 1 roccedings were brought, in the Supreme Court to determine whether tlie, magistrate's refusal to hear the application was right, in law. , . , . His Honour said that the magistrate, having had grove doubt whether he had jurisdiction, had been wise to refuse jurisdiction. That course could not harm plaintiffs, the mother of the child and her husband, because proceedings in the Snnrcme Court for a writ, of mandamus, such as bad been instituted, were open to them, whereas there’would be no appeal from an order by the magistrate. After discussing certain provisions ot the’’ applicable statute, the Infants .Act, 1908. his Honour expressed the opinion that the magistrate had jurisdiction to hear the application for the discharge ot the existing order, but the jurisdiction was a very delicate one which should be exercised with the greatest care and discretion. and an order of adoption should not be discharged lightly. Particularly was that so where the order had been in force for many years aud the. child was well cared for. His decision did not involve any suggestion as to how the magistrate should use his discretion. At. the hearing Mr. A. I'l. Hurley appeared for plaintiffs and Mr. I<. 55L Onglev for the magistrate, Mr. Goulding, S.SL-