FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DENNIS AND ANOR & PRADCHAPHET | [2011] FamCA 123 |
| CHILDREN – Consent orders – Surrogate Mother – Child to live with the father and father’s wife – Court orders equal shared parental responsibility to the father and the father’s wife |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss 61DA, 65C |
| 1st APPLICANT: | Mr Dennis |
| 2nd APPLICANT: | Mrs Dennis |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Pradchaphet |
| FILE NUMBER: | SYC | 7140 | of | 2010 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 22 February 2011 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Sydney |
| PLACE HEARD: | Sydney |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Stevenson J |
| HEARING DATE: | 7 February 2011 |
REPRESENTATION
| SOLICITOR FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND APPLICANT: | Lewis Law |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | No appearance |
Orders
That the child L, born on … August 2009 live with the applicants Mr Dennis and Mrs Dennis.
That the applicants have equal shared parental responsibility for making decisions on both day-to-day and long-term issues in relation to the child.
It is noted that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Dennis and Anor & Pradchaphet is approved pursuant to s 121 (9) (g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
FILE NUMBER: SYC 7140 of 2010
| Mr Dennis and Mrs Dennis |
Applicant
And
| Ms Pradchaphet |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE PROCEEDINGS
On 12 November 2010 Mr Dennis (“the father”) and Mrs Dennis (“the father’s wife’) conjointly filed an application for consent orders in relation to the child L who was born in August 2009. The respondent, Ms Pradchaphet, is the child’s surrogate mother and has no biological relationship with him. Mr Dennis is his biological father.
On 25 October 2010 the father, the father’s wife and Ms Pradchaphet entered into a parenting plan regarding L. The substance of the plan is that:
·Ms Pradchaphet relinquishes all parental rights and obligations in relation to L;
·L lives with the father and his wife;
·The father and his wife have joint equal responsibility for making decisions on all day-to-day and long-term issues relating to the child.
Background
The father was born in 1968 in New Zealand and is now 42 years old. The father’s wife was born in 1968 in Asia and is now 42 years old. The father is an Australian citizen and his wife is a permanent resident of this country. They married in Sydney in 1998 and live permanently in northern Queensland.
The father and his wife spent ten years trying unsuccessfully to have children, with the assistance of IVF technology. Finally they approached doctors at a fertility clinic in Thailand.
Two eggs provided by anonymous donors were fertilised with the father’s genetic material and implanted in surrogate mothers Ms C and Ms Pradchaphet. In August 2009 Ms Pradchaphet gave birth to the child L. On the same day Ms C gave birth to twins, B and C.
The births of the three babies were registered in Thailand, showing the father and the respective surrogate mothers as parents. The father and his wife applied unsuccessfully for Australian citizenship by descent for the three children.
The father…
Continue reading Dennis & Anor and Pradchaphet
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Dennis & Anor and Pradchaphet [2011] FamCA 123
- Case
- [2011] FamCA 123
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were whether it was in the best interests of the child L for L to live with the applicants and whether the applicants should have equal shared parental responsibility for L. These determinations required the court to consider the relevant provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly those pertaining to the best interests of the child and the principles of equal shared parental responsibility.
Stevenson J made orders that the child L live with the applicants, Mr and Mrs Dennis. Furthermore, the court ordered that the applicants have equal shared parental responsibility for making decisions on both day-to-day and long-term issues concerning the child L.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That the child L, born on … August 2009 live with the applicants Mr Dennis and Mrs Dennis.
2.
That the applicants have equal shared parental responsibility for making decisions on both day-to-day and long-term issues in relation to the child.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.