S v D & E [2013] EWHC 134 (Fam) (31 January 2013)

S v D & E [2013] EWHC 134 (Fam) (31 January 2013)

The court held that, in light of the statutory framework of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, which expressly excludes the donor from legal parenthood and is intended to protect same-sex families from donor claims, and considering the factors under s.10(9) of the Children Act 1989, the applicants did not have sufficient connection or arguable case to justify granting leave to apply for s.8 orders. The risk of disruption to the children's lives and the legislative intent to exclude donor claims outweighed any potential benefit of contact. Leave to apply for s.8 orders was refused.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 134 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: S; Respondent: D; Respondent: E; Applicant: T; Respondent: X; Respondent: Y
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Family Law Children Act 1989, S.8 Orders (contact, Parental Responsibility) / Application for Leave to Apply for S.8 Orders; Judgment on Whether Leave Should Be Granted
Outcome
Applications for leave to apply for s.8 orders refused.
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibility, Contact Orders, Legal Parenthood, Assisted Reproduction, Same Sex Parenting, Donor Rights, Section 10(9) Children Act 1989, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008
Family Law Child Law Human Fertilisation and Embryology Parental Responsibility Contact Orders Legal Parenthood Assisted Reproduction Same Sex Parenting +3 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S

Applicant

D

Respondent

E

Respondent

T

Applicant

X

Respondent

Y

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Children Act 1989, S.8 Orders (contact, Parental Responsibility) / Application for Leave to Apply for S.8 Orders; Judgment on Whether Leave Should Be Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a sperm donor to a lesbian couple in a civil partnership can be granted leave to apply for orders under s.8 of the Children Act 1989 in respect of the child conceived.
  2. 2 How the policy and statutory framework of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 affects the rights of biological fathers in such circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the applications for leave would disrupt the children's lives to their detriment under s.10(9) Children Act 1989.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, in light of the statutory framework of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, which expressly excludes the donor from legal parenthood and is intended to protect same-sex families from donor claims, and considering the factors under s.10(9) of the Children Act 1989, the applicants did not have sufficient connection or arguable case to justify granting leave to apply for s.8 orders. The risk of disruption to the children's lives and the legislative intent to exclude donor claims outweighed any potential benefit of contact. Leave to apply for s.8 orders was refused.

Court Disposition

Applications for leave to apply for s.8 orders refused.

Orders

  • Leave to apply for orders under s.8 Children Act 1989 in respect of G and Z is refused.
  • No order as to costs.