X & Anor v Z & Ors

The applicants established, on the balance of probabilities, that at least one of them had acquired a domicile of choice in the UK at the relevant times, based on consistent oral and written evidence and corroborative actions, despite limited documentary evidence and ongoing US tax residence. All statutory criteria for a parental order were met, and making the order was in the child’s welfare interests.

Parties: Applicant: X; Applicant: Y; Respondent (gestational Surrogate): Z; Respondent (child): B (through her Children’s Guardian, Jane Biggs); Advocate for 2nd Respondent: Cafcass Legal (Mr Jamie Niven-Philips)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 28 March 2023
Procedural Posture: Parental Order Application (surrogacy) / Final Judgment
Outcome: Parental order granted
Legal Topics: Surrogacy, Parental Orders, Domicile, Child Welfare

Family Law Surrogacy Parental Orders Domicile 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Applicant

Respondent (gestational Surrogate)

B (through her Children’s Guardian, Jane Biggs)

Respondent (child)

Cafcass Legal (Mr Jamie Niven-Philips)

Advocate for 2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Parental Order Application (surrogacy) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicants satisfy the domicile requirement under s54(4)(b) Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 for a parental order
2 Whether all other statutory criteria for a parental order are met
3 Whether making a parental order is in the child’s welfare interests

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Parental order granted

Orders

A parental order is made in favour of the applicants X and Y in relation to the child B.