Ellison and Anor & Karnchanit

In the Family Court of Australia, Justice Ryan considered declarations of parentage and parental responsibility concerning two children born in January 2011. The applicants, Mr Ellison and Ms Solano, sought declarations that Mr Ellison was the father of the children and that they shared parental responsibility. The dispute centred on the application of certain provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to children born overseas, specifically concerning artificial conception procedures and surrogacy arrangements.

The court was required to determine whether the geographical limitations within Division 12 of Part VII of the *Family Law Act* meant that provisions such as section 60H (children born as a result of artificial conception procedures) and section 60HB (children born under surrogacy arrangements) only applied to children born in Australia. Furthermore, the court needed to consider the conferral of jurisdiction on the Family Court in relation to matters arising under Part VII, particularly in light of the High Court's decision in *MIMIA v B*.

Justice Ryan's reasoning drew upon the High Court's discussion in *G v H* regarding parenting presumptions and declarations of parentage. The court acknowledged that while a determination of parentage is a serious matter, the presumptions within the Act operate in the child's interests to establish parental duties and responsibilities unless rebutted. Regarding jurisdiction, the court applied the principles from *MIMIA v B*, noting that section 69H(1) of the Act, which confers jurisdiction on the Family Court in relation to matters arising under Part VII, is not a self-contained conferral of federal jurisdiction. Instead, the "matters" over which the Court has jurisdiction are identified by reference to other provisions within Part VII, requiring a search for a relevant matter arising under that Part.

The court declared Mr Ellison to be the father of both children and that Mr Ellison and Ms Solano shared parental responsibility. It was further ordered that the children live with the applicants, and all outstanding applications were dismissed. The orders also included particulars of obligations, consequences of contravention, and assistance for compliance, as set out in an attached Fact Sheet.