In an article in the Daily Telegraph, we are told that Mr Justice Cobb (and we hope and assume very much that this is the one and the same Stephen Cobb QC who was recently appointed a high court judge), has prevented a local authority from taking away a child from their adoptive mother, who had recently gone blind.
The article tells us that the local authority had made only superficial enquiries, something that happens too often, and that no attempts had been made to give the adoptive mother assistance before trying to remove the child despite the continued efforts of the family to seek out such help, something, unfortunately, which happens far too frequently, also.
The piece in the Telegraph is a must-read. It’s been a long time since we’ve awarded anyone Judge of The Week, but Mr Justice Cobb is our Judge of the Week, for his bravery, common sense and compassion. We will look forward to reading more about the cases he works on in the future from what is sure to be a cutting-edge judge, blazing a trail in the right direction.
The judgment can be read here.
Stephen Cobb
Researching Reform 
SO MIRACLES REALLY DO HAPPEN !!
LikeLike
I think this is what happens when sensible people do the judging….
LikeLike
It’s not justice until the social services are made to pay for their unlawful persecution of this lady. Mr Justice Cobb’s decision was right; nice to have a judge who knows the law. But the case should never have gone before him. It was the usual attempt at child theft with malice. I hope the assistance the judge has directed the social services must provide are done with private agencies so this lady has some protection from those who have wronged her and may yet do so again in the future. They did not want to pay for the support they were legally obliged to provide; they just wanted a quick profit and get her off their books. What the the Local Authority were trying to do was akin to ‘ringing a motor’; the illegal process of stealing a car and changing its identity to trade on. If the baby had already been adopted once, were they not simply stealing back a child already traded and cashing in again? That they even thought they could do this through the courts should be reason to condemn the courts.
The following is not directed at Cobb as he hasn’t been a judge long enough for us to judge him. (A flying start). But one has to look deeper. Why are fit, able, biological parents not afforded the same protection in contested adoption cases? Why does the ‘permanency principal’ (that the child must stay with those he knows) only kick in when the child has been with adoptive parents, rather than beforehand when with his biological parents? Whilst it is heartening to see Cobb’s decision, and how he clarifies the law so clearly to the LA involved, is it a political decision?
Is he protecting the adoption industry? Providing adopters with the confidence they need to maintain the market for traded children, which profits lawyers more than anybody and creates a multi-million pound industry for ex social workers? Is he, by finding in favour of somebody clearly the underdog, sending a specious message that the courts look after everybody? Come on in!!!! Excuse my skepticism, but this may have been an excellent opportunity for a marketing coup for maintaining the status quo, not an indication of change.
I hope I am wrong. I hope Cobb’s decision is indicative of all being how it should be….a very highly experienced lawyer then turning judge in the same field as he has specialised for a long time. They should all be like him; they should know what they are talking about and apply the law as intended. In truth, we’ll never know, as the only cases that make such wide headlines are the ones where the court does well, and they are few and far between.
LikeLike
When I think about whether the birth parents of the child in question were dealt with with similar fairness, I feel less inclined to rejoice at the decision.
LikeLike
That’s an entirely separate issue, which shouldn’t be held against the judge in this case. It’s very easy to be angry at the world, but how we choose to approach each problem will ultimately make the difference between success and failure. There’s no doubt that the issue you mention is part and parcel of the problems in the system, but let’s be fair. After all, if we behave just like everyone else, we are no more valuable.
LikeLike
I think we need more judges like this one! He has his head screwed on and knows what is right. Respect to him! What a good man!
LikeLike
I totally agree that we need more judges like Mr Justice Cobb, who is fair and knows the law god bless him. Maybe I should get him to re look at my case and tell me what he truly thinks about my niece being forced for adoption.
LikeLike
Alas ! All this praise has gone to his head ! In the Mail today (March 28th) you can read how Judge Cobb gagged an old lady of 94 after the court of protection decided that social workers should take over her banks and her house (£350,000 value) rather than her carers whom she was happy with as they came like her from the same district in St Lucia.If you dare to speak to the press I
LikeLike
Oh dear….
LikeLike
Got cut off ,but suffice to say Judge Cobb threatened this old lady of 94 with jail and forfeiture of her assets (house and bank balances) if she dared to complain again publicly about the way she has been treated by bullying social workers.”Court of Protection ?” Just WHO are they protecting?????????????????
LikeLike