W, Re (Rev 1)

W, Re (Rev 1)

All statutory criteria under section 54 HFEA 2008 are satisfied; the applicants acted in good faith and without moral taint; the payments, though technically unlawful in Nevada, are not criminal, not disproportionate, and do not amount to an abuse of public policy; the welfare of the children overwhelmingly supports making the parental orders.

Parties
Applicant: KL; Applicant: MW; Respondent: DP; Advocate to the Court: Cafcass Legal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Parental Order Application (surrogacy) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Parental orders granted in favour of the applicants for all three children.
Legal Topics
Parental Orders, International Surrogacy, Public Policy, Child Welfare
Family Law Surrogacy Parental Orders International Surrogacy Public Policy Child Welfare

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KL

Applicant

MW

Applicant

DP

Respondent

Cafcass Legal

Advocate to the Court

Procedural Posture

Parental Order Application (surrogacy) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the criteria under section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 are satisfied for granting parental orders in an international surrogacy arrangement
  2. 2 Whether payments made to the surrogate and agency should be retrospectively authorised under section 54(8) HFEA 2008 given public policy concerns
  3. 3 Whether the applicants acted in good faith and without moral taint in the surrogacy arrangement

Ratio Decidendi

All statutory criteria under section 54 HFEA 2008 are satisfied; the applicants acted in good faith and without moral taint; the payments, though technically unlawful in Nevada, are not criminal, not disproportionate, and do not amount to an abuse of public policy; the welfare of the children overwhelmingly supports making the parental orders.

Court Disposition

Parental orders granted in favour of the applicants for all three children.

Orders

  • Parental orders made in favour of KL and MW for children E, S, and G.
  • Payments made to CSP and DP retrospectively authorised under section 54(8) HFEA 2008.