Belfast Health and Social Care Trust and AP and AU
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Rooney J |
| Judgment Date | 17 November 2023 |
| Neutral Citation | [2023] NIFam 16 |
| Court | Family Division (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2023] NIFam 16
Judgment: approved by the court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: ROO12289
ICOS No:
Delivered: 27/10/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
FAMILY DIVISION
___________
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 1995
Between:
BELFAST HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE TRUST
Applicant
and
AP
and
AU
Respondents
___________
Ms S Simpson KC with Mr Clelland (instructed by Directora te of Legal Services) for the
Applicant
Ms Smyth KC with Mr McCa be (instructe d by McIlvenny Law, Solicitors ) for AU
Ms Hannigan K C and Ms Ross (instructed by Donnelly & Wall, Solicitors) for the
Children’s Court Guardian
___________
ROONEY J
Introduction
[1] I have anonymised the judgment to protect the identity of the children. The
randomly chosen ciphers ‘AP’ and ‘AU’ have been used for the respondents. The
children will be referred to as ‘F’ and ‘M.’ Nothing must be published that will lead
to their identification.
[2] In a statement dated 23 September 2023 and in his oral evidence, AU stated
that he was the biological father, by commercial surrogacy, of his two children, F and
M who are twins. The children were born in May 2020. From birth until July 2022,
2
the children lived with their surrogate mother, AP in the Philippines. The children
met AU for the first time in July 2022.
[3] From July 2022 to November 2022, AU states that the children lived in the
Philippines with him and AP. In November 2022, AU brought the children to
Australia where they lived with him until February 2023. As considered in more
detail below, AU and the children left Australia in February 2023 and travelled to
Thailand, Malasia, Dubai, Italy and France. In August 2023, AU and the children
arrived in the south of Ireland before travelling to Northern Ireland on 18 August
2023.
[4] AU states that he is a British citizen living in Melbourne, Australia. The
children are Filipino and Australian citizens. AU has another child, namely T, who
was also conceived through surrogacy. T, his daughter, remained in Australia when
AU travelled to the Philippines in July 2022. T remains in Australia. It is unclear
whether AU is T’s biological father.
[5] The court has been provided with the report from the North Eastern
Melbourne Investigation and Response Team dated 3 May 2023. The report
provides that in November 2022, AU was stopped by Border Control at Sydney
Airport. Concerns were raised about child exploitation and human trafficking
because the children’s birth countries were high-risk areas. Upon inspection of AU’s
luggage, it was noted that there was a lack of children’s belongings which would
have been expected for a long journey with two small children. It was also noted
that AU had multiple devices, including phones, laptops, hard drives and computer
devices. However, these devices had been stripped internally with hard drives
hidden. Border Control raised concerns in relation to child sexual exploitation.
AU’s bag also contained a penis enlarger, rubbish and a camp cooker. During the
process, AU was described as hostile, non-cooperative and occasionally aggressive.
[6] The report also refers to nine previous reports in relation to T’s safety and
well-being in the care of AU between 2011 and 2022. Concerns were also expressed
with regard to AU’s lack of engagement with Child Protection, parenting issues,
homelessness, lack of school attendance and AU’s mental health issues. Although
Child Protection obtained court orders in 2012, these were later withdrawn due to a
lack of evidence.
[7] In November 2022, a decision was made that careful planning needed to occur
and that information should be shared between the Australian Federal Police (AFP),
the AFP Joint Anti-Child Exploitation Team (JACET), the Sexual Offences and Child
Abuse Investigation Team (SOCIT), Border Force and Child Protection.
[8] Border Force provided information that JACET had assessed that there were
no concerns that the children were being trafficked. SOCIT advised that there was
nothing illegal or incriminating on AU’s phone. Inappropriate material was,
however, noted.
To continue reading
Request your trial