2025/04/27 by Elvira Loibl
Social Sciences · #Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
paper · doi:10.1177/1023263x251336671
openalex publication_date 2025/04/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
On 19 April 2024, the Dutch Supreme Court rendered a ruling in the case of Dilani Butink, a Dutch adoptee from Sri Lanka who initiated legal proceedings against the adoption agency and the Dutch state. The latter, the plaintiff asserted, had failed to adequately investigate the legitimacy of her adoption in 1992 amidst widespread reports of abuses occurring in Sri Lanka during that period. She argued that this negligence had contributed to the ongoing uncertainty regarding her origins and the circumstances of her relinquishment for adoption. Claiming violations of her rights to identity and origin under the ECHR, the plaintiff demanded financial reparations from the two stakeholders. The Supreme Court's ruling in this case serves as a significant point of reference in the ongoing discourse on reparation in the aftermath of past illegal intercountry adoption, not only in the Netherlands but also in other European countries. This case note explores the complexities surrounding the questions regarding accountability of stakeholders in the receiving countries in cases of illegal intercountry adoptions.