[2025] EWHC 927 (Fam)

As Mr Powell submitted, Mr and Mrs K satisfy the criteria in s.54. B was carried by Mrs Z and Mr K’s sperm, alongside a donor egg, was used to create the embryo. Mr and Mrs K are a married couple of many years and they are both plainly over the age of 18. Both of them have a domicile of origin in this jurisdiction which has not been surrendered and B has had his home with them both when the application was made in July 2024 and at the date of this hearing in March 2025. The application was also made within six months of B’s birth. Mr and Mrs Z consented to the making of a parental order on 23 August 2024 by signing the relevant form and their signatures were duly notarised as this was a formal agreement executed outside the United Kingdom.

Mr and Mrs K set out the payments made to Mr and Mrs Z and to the surrogacy agency in detail and with commendable transparency in the evidence placed before the court. In sum total, they spent £151,059.68 of which £24,635.59 were costs reasonably incurred. Though the remaining sum requiring the court’s authorisation amounts to £126,424.09, this sum is in accordance with the surrogacy agreement entered into with a reputable surrogacy agency in California where such payments are lawful. There has been no abuse of public policy with respect to the payments received by the surrogate of some £61,254: she has received the monies owed to her and those sums were, in a Californian context, not so great as to distort her agency within not only the surrogacy process but also within these legal proceedings. Ultimately however, B’s welfare is paramount and overrides these matters because he needs a parental order to recognise and cement his place in his new family. Thus, I authorise the payments made in this case.