Application of MGO and AAO; re LDC [2011] NSWSC 951

Application of MGO and AAO; re LDC [2011] NSWSC 951

Although the applicants appeared fit and proper adoptive parents and an adoption order otherwise appeared appropriate, the Court could not make the order because there was no evidence that the Convention-required Article 15 and Article 16 reports had been prepared and transmitted between the NSW Central Authority and the Inter-Country Adoption Board of the Philippines, and no evidence that the Inter-Country Adoption Board of the Philippines had agreed to the adoption of the child as required by regulation 15(3)(a).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Adoption Order / Application Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division Adoption List
Outcome
Declined to make the adoption order at this stage and adjourned the application.
Legal Topics
['intercountry Adoption' 'hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption' 'convention Country Procedural Requirements' 'central Authority Agreement']
['family Law' 'child Welfare' 'adoption'] ['intercountry Adoption' 'hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption' 'convention Country Procedural Requirements' 'central Authority Agreement']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Adoption Order / Application Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division Adoption List

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an adoption order could be made in Australia for a child habitually resident in the Philippines where the applicants were habitually resident in Australia.' 'Whether the evidence established that the adoption arrangements were made in accordance with the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, including the required Article 15 and Article 16 reports.' 'Whether the evidence established that the Inter-Country Adoption Board of the Philippines had agreed to the adoption of the child.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicants appeared fit and proper adoptive parents and an adoption order otherwise appeared appropriate, the Court could not make the order because there was no evidence that the Convention-required Article 15 and Article 16 reports had been prepared and transmitted between the NSW Central Authority and the Inter-Country Adoption Board of the Philippines, and no evidence that the Inter-Country Adoption Board of the Philippines had agreed to the adoption of the child as required by regulation 15(3)(a).

Court Disposition

Declined to make the adoption order at this stage and adjourned the application.

Orders

  • ['The application is adjourned to a date to be fixed by arrangement with the Associate.' 'The Registrar is directed to notify the applicants and the Director-General of this order and provide to them a copy of the judgment.']