Case No. ZC96-22

a case concerning an analogous provision in the Court of Protection Rules 2017, the Court of Appeal made it absolutely clear that such wide ranging powers to remove a party have to be exercised in accordance with the overriding objective and with wider principles of law and justice which have been developed and recognised both at common law and under the Human Rights Act 1998. 24.In my judgment the extraordinary and extreme circumstances of this case justify such a draconian order, not only because of the matters I have set out above but also because the applicants and K object to the mother being notified so strongly that if this was to be directed they would apply for leave for the adoption application to be withdrawn.25. The reasons for their objections are set out in some detail in a statement filed on their behalf and contained in the court bundle. The applicants believe that notification to the mother poses a risk of harm to K, both physical and emotional. The murder of the father was premeditated and for financial gain, and was carried out by the mother with other relatives and the assistance of a ‘hit man’. The applicants fear that notifying the mother could lead to K being traced by people who wish to gain financially from him and/or cause him harm. They also fear that notifying the mother will affect K emotionally. He suffered great trauma in his early life as a result of his mother’s crimes, spending several months in an orphanage whilst proceedings about his future took place. The applicants secured the services of an eminent expert, Dr. Dora Black, to advise them how to ameliorate the emotional harm caused to him. K has flourished with the exceptional care and loving security he has been provided with by the applicants and wider paternal family, but he remains vulnerable, suffering from an episode of depression in early 2020.26.The applicants also point out that the mother has not seen or had any contact with K since the goodbye visit about 15 years ago, as advised by Dr. Black. She committed a terrible crime and deprived K of his father. She has no parental responsibility in her own country, and so far as she is concerned, relinquished parental responsibility to the applicants long ago. 27.These factors are so clear and compelling that I consider that it would be just and right for the mother to be removed as a party without notice to her. In coming to this conclusion, it is an important factor that I am dealing with a young man of 18, now an adult rather than a child. I have also had regard to the case of