Applications for the Confirmation of three Surrogate Motherhood Agreements (2011/153, 2011/154, 2011/679 , 2011/1314, 2011/1315, 2011/1316), Ex parte [2011] ZAGPJHC 9; 2011 (6) SA 22 (GSJ) (1 March 2011)

Applications for the Confirmation of three Surrogate Motherhood Agreements (2011/153, 2011/154, 2011/679 , 2011/1314, 2011/1315, 2011/1316), Ex parte [2011] ZAGPJHC 9; 2011 (6) SA 22 (GSJ) (1 March 2011)

The court found that the applications for confirmation of surrogate motherhood agreements were procedurally and substantively deficient. The affidavits were shoddily drafted, contained contradictions, and lacked supporting facts regarding the applicants’ domicile, suitability, financial position, and care arrangements for the child. Expert reports were superficial and unreliable, and the attorney’s conduct in repeatedly enrolling the same matters under different case numbers and before different judges was reprehensible. The court emphasized its role as upper guardian of children and the need for strict compliance with statutory and constitutional requirements. Without full and reliable...

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 9
Parties
Applicant: Applicants for the Confirmation of Surrogate Motherhood Agreements
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 March 2011
Case Number
2011/153
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Confirmation of Surrogate Motherhood Agreements Postponed for Supplementation
Outcome
Applications postponed sine die for correction and supplementation to comply with statutory and constitutional requirements.
Judges
W L Wepener, M Victor
Legal Topics
Surrogate Motherhood Agreements, Children Act, Court as Upper Guardian, Practice Directive, Compensation in Surrogacy, Screening of Commissioning Parents
Family and Children Civil Procedure Surrogate Motherhood Agreements Children Act Court as Upper Guardian Practice Directive Compensation in Surrogacy Screening of Commissioning Parents

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 6 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicants for the Confirmation of Surrogate Motherhood Agreements

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Confirmation of Surrogate Motherhood Agreements Postponed for Supplementation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications for confirmation of surrogate motherhood agreements comply with the Children’s Act and constitutional requirements.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have provided sufficient and reliable information to enable the court to confirm the agreements.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the applicants’ attorney in repeatedly enrolling the same matters under different case numbers was appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applications for confirmation of surrogate motherhood agreements were procedurally and substantively deficient. The affidavits were shoddily drafted, contained contradictions, and lacked supporting facts regarding the applicants’ domicile, suitability, financial position, and care arrangements for the child. Expert reports were superficial and unreliable, and the attorney’s conduct in repeatedly enrolling the same matters under different case numbers and before different judges was reprehensible. The court emphasized its role as upper guardian of children and the need for strict compliance with statutory and constitutional requirements. Without full and reliable...

Court Disposition

Applications postponed sine die for correction and supplementation to comply with statutory and constitutional requirements.

Orders

  • The applications for confirmation of surrogate motherhood agreements are postponed sine die.
  • Applicants are directed to correct and supplement their applications to comply fully with the Children’s Act and provide sufficient information for the court to consider the merits.