Application of RM and ESM re Y [2004] NSWSC 937

Application of RM and ESM re Y [2004] NSWSC 937

The Court could not approve the proposed added given names because the applicants had not shown special reasons related to the child's best interests under Adoption Act 2000, s.101(5). The child's established use of the proposed first name was insufficient, as adoptive parents cannot create a fait accompli contrary to the statutory policy. Possible mispronunciation of the existing Korean given names by English speakers was not special in contemporary Australia absent an undesirable, objectionable or belittling pronunciation. The adopting mother's family attachment to the proposed additional name was not a reason related to the child's best interests. Because the Court could only approve...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Adoption Order Concerning an Overseas Adoption / Application Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division, Adoptions List; Leave to Amend Summons
Outcome
Leave granted to amend the summons; the Court did not make the adoption order on the summons as filed.
Legal Topics
['overseas Adoption' 'change of Name of Adopted Child' 'special Reasons Under Adoption Act 2000, S.101' 'best Interests of the Child']
['family Law' 'adoption Law'] ['overseas Adoption' 'change of Name of Adopted Child' 'special Reasons Under Adoption Act 2000, S.101' 'best Interests of the Child']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Adoption Order Concerning an Overseas Adoption / Application Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division, Adoptions List; Leave to Amend Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court could approve the addition of proposed given names for a child who was more than one year old and a non-citizen child under Adoption Act 2000, s.101(5).' "Whether the child's use of an alternative name since placement with the applicants constituted special reasons related to the best interests of the child." "Whether possible mispronunciation of the child's Korean given names by English speakers constituted special reasons related to the best interests of the child." "Whether the adopting mother's family attachment to a proposed additional name constituted special reasons related to the best interests of the child."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court could not approve the proposed added given names because the applicants had not shown special reasons related to the child's best interests under Adoption Act 2000, s.101(5). The child's established use of the proposed first name was insufficient, as adoptive parents cannot create a fait accompli contrary to the statutory policy. Possible mispronunciation of the existing Korean given names by English speakers was not special in contemporary Australia absent an undesirable, objectionable or belittling pronunciation. The adopting mother's family attachment to the proposed additional name was not a reason related to the child's best interests. Because the Court could only approve...

Court Disposition

Leave granted to amend the summons; the Court did not make the adoption order on the summons as filed.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted for the plaintiffs to amend their summons by substituting for the existing prayers 1 and 2 a prayer seeking an adoption order and approval of names that it is open to the Court to approve consistently with Adoption Act 2000, s.101(5) and the reasons.' 'The amended summons is to be referred to Barrett...