Case No. EWFC-115
Family Court

Case No. EWFC-115

Fecha: 21-Jul-2021

Relevant background

3The background to this matter is that J has for some-time known that she wanted to have a child of her own. Following the breakdown of relationships, she decided to seek fertility treatment as a single person in the United Kingdom which was unsuccessful. She decided to consider surrogacy and engaged a United States surrogacy agency. Through that agency she was introduced to K, the respondent.4Following their introduction, they entered into a gestational surrogacy agreement in November 2017. That was a commercial surrogacy arrangement, permitted in the jurisdiction in which it was entered into and is supported by the underlying legal framework that operates there.5An embryo was created with donor gametes and transferred to the respondent surrogate in May 2018. Pregnancy was confirmed and L born in early 2019. J had wisely and appropriately issued the necessary applications in the United States to be able to secure her legal status in relation to L on his birth. That was confirmed by way of the parentage order made by the Superior Court in California just after L’s birth.6J and L stayed in the United States for about five weeks following the birth whilst the necessary immigration procedures were undertaken. A US passport was issued, and they came to this jurisdiction soon afterwards.7Following their return here to the family home in south west London, J was contacted by the local authority who had been alerted by the UK Border Agency. There were two visits by the social worker and the file was closed, as there were no welfare concerns.8In April 2019, J applied for L to be granted British nationality on a discretionary basis under the Home Office British Nationality Policy on Surrogacy. That was granted in July 2019 and a British passport was issued for L.9J now seeks an adoption order to be able to secure her legal parental relationship in this jurisdiction with L, to provide him with the security as his legal parent. To do that it was necessary for an application to be made for leave to make the application before the three-year residence requirement set out in s.42 Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002). The application was made on 20 March, and this court granted leave under s.42(6) ACA 2002 on 12 May, made directions in relation to service of the order, the application and the statement in support on the local authority. Upon expiry of the relevant notice period under s.44(3) the adoption application could be made. I also made directions that if the r.14.11 report had not been filed the matter could be restored for further directions.10Following the 12 May order, J’s solicitors wrote to the local authority on 17 June giving them formal notice of the intention to make an adoption application for the purposes of s.44 ACA 2002. This prompted the allocation of the r.14.11 report to be prepared by Ms Clare Moatti. 11That report was prepared in accordance with the provisions in r.14.11.The Family Procedure Rules 2010 provides for the structure of those reports and what they should contain. The final report is dated 1 December 2020. As part of the preparation of that report Ms Moatti was able to visit L monthly, met with J on seven occasions, individually undertook the necessary safeguarding checks, took up the references that were offered and also the details in relation to the medical information. The report is clear in its recommendation, it supports the court making an adoption order.12Following receipt of that report the adoption application was made on 14 June 2021. I made directions on paper on 21 June, directing that it was not necessary for L to be joined and to have a children's guardian as I did not consider, in the circumstances of this case, it was necessary. I made directions for J to file an updating statement, which she did dated 7 July, and for the application, directions order and updating statement to be served on the local authority with a direction for them to notify the court and the applicant whether they intended to attend this hearing or make any representations. That was duly done. They have confirmed that they support the application, support the order being made, do not wish to make any further representations or attend the hearing.13I also made directions in relation to service on the respondent, K. She was served and responded to say that she was not going to attend the hearing but very clear her support for the adoption order remains.