H v S (Surrogacy Agreememt)

H v S (Surrogacy Agreememt)

M's welfare requires that she live with H and B, both of whom are able to provide a stable, child-centred environment and promote her identity and emotional development. S's conduct, including repeated disruption of contact, attempts to exclude B, and breach of court orders, demonstrates inability to prioritise M's needs and risks emotional harm. Supervised contact is necessary to protect M and reduce conflict. Parental responsibility is granted to B by virtue of the child arrangements order. Orders are made regarding M's name, travel, and reporting restrictions to safeguard her welfare.

Parties
1st Applicant / Father: H; 2nd Applicant / Partner: B; 1st Respondent / Mother: S; 2nd Respondent / Child (by Guardian): M (A Child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Family / Children Act Proceedings / Final Judgment
Outcome
Child arrangements order: M to live with H and B; supervised contact with S; parental responsibility for both H and B; orders regarding name, travel, reporting restrictions; s91(14) application to be considered further.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Parental Responsibility, Contact Orders, Prohibited Steps Orders, Change of Name, Reporting Restrictions, Section 91(14) Applications
Family Law Child Law Child Arrangements Parental Responsibility Contact Orders Prohibited Steps Orders Change of Name Reporting Restrictions +1 more

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 7 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H

1st Applicant / Father

B

2nd Applicant / Partner

S

1st Respondent / Mother

M (A Child)

2nd Respondent / Child (by Guardian)

Procedural Posture

Family / Children Act Proceedings / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who should have primary residence of M?
  2. 2 Should parental responsibility be granted to B?
  3. 3 What contact arrangements are in M's best interests?

Ratio Decidendi

M's welfare requires that she live with H and B, both of whom are able to provide a stable, child-centred environment and promote her identity and emotional development. S's conduct, including repeated disruption of contact, attempts to exclude B, and breach of court orders, demonstrates inability to prioritise M's needs and risks emotional harm. Supervised contact is necessary to protect M and reduce conflict. Parental responsibility is granted to B by virtue of the child arrangements order. Orders are made regarding M's name, travel, and reporting restrictions to safeguard her welfare.

Court Disposition

Child arrangements order: M to live with H and B; supervised contact with S; parental responsibility for both H and B; orders regarding name, travel, reporting restrictions; s91(14) application to be considered further.

Orders

  • M shall live with H and B; both have parental responsibility.
  • Supervised contact between M and S until further order.