In a landmark decision, the Court of Session has allowed two individuals, who had separated, to continue with an adoption jointly, despite no longer cohabiting. This is believed to be the first published Scottish ruling of its kind.
What are the facts of this adoption case?
The applicants were a couple (never married or in a civil partnership) who already jointly adopted one child and were in the process of adopting a sibling.
They separated mid-process but sought to complete the adoption jointly rather than proceeding separately.
Under the current adoption legislation, a “relevant couple” eligible to adopt jointly is defined as people who are either married, in a civil partnership, or “living together as if civil partners or spouses in an enduring family relationship.”
Because the applicants were no longer living together, they risked being forced to abandon a joint application and instead leave one party to adopt alone.
What was the Court’s Reasoning on Adoption when Separated?
The Court of Session adopted a “broad and flexible” interpretation of the statutory requirement. It held that the purpose of the “living together” provision is to protect the welfare of the child, by ensuring adoption into a stable family unit.
The Court recognised that co-residence is not an absolute requirement; what matters is whether the adopters maintain a stable parental relationship in practice, able to work together in the child’s best interests.
In this case, although not sharing a home, the applicants showed that they had created a cohesive family life post separation, and that they continued to act cooperatively in caring for their children.
The Court therefore permitted them to be treated as a relevant couple for adoption purposes.
What is the Significance & Implications of this Ruling on Family Law?
This judgment reflects evolving family dynamics and indicates that Scottish family law may be becoming more adaptable to non-traditional family structures.
The ruling emphasises that the child’s welfare remains paramount, and that formal legal tests must sometimes be interpreted flexibly to reflect the reality of caring relationships.
For adoption practitioners, this decision may pave the way for those who are separated but are co-operating and still wish to co-parent.
It also highlights the importance of evidence of cooperative parenting and a stable integrated family life when arguing that separated individuals should still count as a “relevant couple.”
If you would like to discuss this ruling and the implications, contact the family law experts at Rollos.