A father who claimed damages because of problems caused when he adopted a violent boy is still in contact with the youngster.

The High Court ruled the couple should be compensated because Essex County Council had not given them enough information about the child's background.

The boy, described as "uncontrollable and vicious" was aged five at the time of his initial placement with the couple in 1996, and is now 12.

However, the father - who cannot be named for legal reasons - is still in contact with the boy.

Bouncy castle attack

The court was told the child is now in the care of Essex County Council.

The father said: "I will always do my best for him.

"I will suffer for my children because they are mine and to this day I continue to support bringing my son up."

The court heard that at his seventh birthday party the boy attacked other children on a bouncy castle.

When the adoptive mother became pregnant, the boy threatened several times to kill the unborn child, and attacked her during a Greek island holiday, putting her in hospital for several days.

He was later diagnosed as suffering from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Since 1999 he has been under medication in special needs care.

The court heard that the couple married in 1985.

By 1990 they had no children together and applied to be approved as prospective adoptive parents.

Constant supervision

In 1991 the couple were approved by the Essex County Council's adoption panel.

The panel recommended two young children, a brother and sister, for adoption.

The court was told that the couple were not shown reports indicating that the boy was so disturbed he would require constant supervision.

Edward Faulks QC, for the council, said the boy had been with the couple for a 14 month placement before the final adoption order was made.

He asked the father if he had thought it would have been a good idea to seek support from social services before the adoption, when the couple were already experiencing problems with the boy.

'Expected behaviour'

The father said: "No, I was too proud.

"We were afraid they would say we were not capable of handling this child.

"I got to the point of thinking he is my child, although not yet legally adopted, and I am going to sort these problems out."

Consultant social worker Sarah Borthwick, who was called as an expert witness for the council, told Mr Justice Buckley she would "expect some of this kind of behaviour" in a child going through the adoption process.

Mrs Borthwick was asked by the couple's barrister Gavin Millar QC, whether she would expect written records to be kept of conversations with prospective adopters.

She said it would be "good practice" to do so, but it did not always happen.