CRISP & CLARENCE

The case of Crisp & Clarence concerned a dispute between the applicant, the biological progenitor of a child conceived via IVF using donor sperm, and the respondent, the surrogate mother. The central issue before Berman J was whether the applicant qualified as a parent of the child, either under state legislation or the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The child was born in South Australia, but the IVF procedure took place in another state. A further consideration was whether the parties had been in a de facto relationship, which would impact the child's legal status.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues: first, whether the applicant was a parent of the child, and second, whether a de facto relationship existed between the parties, particularly in light of a disputed date of separation. The court also had to consider the parental responsibility and living arrangements for the child, given the parties resided in different states.

Berman J found that a de facto relationship had endured beyond the date of conception, notwithstanding a physical separation. This finding was crucial in establishing the applicant's parental status. The court ultimately ordered shared parental responsibility for the child, with the respondent having sole responsibility for the child's education and major long-term health decisions, subject to consultation with the applicant. The child was ordered to live with the respondent, with gradually increasing time to be spent with the applicant. The court also made detailed orders regarding the child's time with each parent, including provisions for travel, communication, and the amendment of the child's birth registration to name the applicant as a parent.