Court grants parental order in complex international surrogacy case

Introduction

The Family Court, presided over by Mrs Justice Theis DBE, recently delivered a judgment granting a parental order in a complex international surrogacy case. The case involved the applicant, X, who is the biological father of the child, Z, and the respondent, W, the gestational surrogate. The child, Z, was represented by his Children's Guardian, Mr Viney. The surrogacy arrangement was facilitated by a clinic in Northern Cyprus and an agency registered in Israel, with the surrogate being a Kyrgyzstan national.

Background

The surrogacy arrangement crossed multiple jurisdictions, highlighting the complexities involved. The embryo was created using X's gametes and a donor egg, with the surrogate travelling to Northern Cyprus for the embryo transfer. Initially, the intention was for Z to be born in the Czech Republic, but due to unforeseen circumstances, the birth took place in Moldova. X faced significant challenges in navigating the legal and logistical aspects of the surrogacy arrangement, relying heavily on the Clinic and Agency's guidance.

Legal Considerations

The court had to consider several criteria under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008. Five of these criteria were readily established, including the use of X's gametes, the timing of the application, and X's domicile. However, the court had to carefully examine the consent of the surrogate and the payments made to her, which were not directly paid by X but through the Agency.

Consent and Payments

The surrogate's consent was a crucial aspect of the case. Although the consent document lacked a notary stamp, Mr Viney's conversation with the surrogate confirmed her understanding and agreement to the parental order. The court also scrutinised the payments made to the surrogate, which were described as compensation for her support costs. Despite the lack of detailed information on the payments, the court authorised them, considering X's good faith and the paramountcy of Z's welfare.

Welfare Considerations

The court prioritised Z's lifelong welfare, supported by Mr Viney's reports, which highlighted the stable and loving environment provided by X and his family. Z was observed to be thriving, meeting developmental milestones, and having a secure home environment. The court concluded that a parental order would best serve Z's welfare needs, securing his legal relationship with X.

Judgment

Mrs Justice Theis DBE granted the parental order, emphasising the importance of considering the welfare of the child above all else. The judgment underscored the need for intended parents to be fully informed of the legal complexities involved in international surrogacy arrangements and the potential lifelong consequences for the child.

Conclusion

This case serves as a reminder of the intricate legal landscape surrounding international surrogacy and the importance of ensuring all parties are well-informed and supported throughout the process. The court's decision reflects a careful balance between legal principles and the welfare of the child, providing a clear framework for future cases of a similar nature.

Learn More

For more information on surrogacy and related legal issues, see BeCivil's guide to UK Family Law.