C & Anor v E (International Surrogacy and Domestic Adoption)
| Judge | Mr Justice Macdonald |
| Judgment Date | 31 March 2025 |
| Neutral Citation | [2025] EWFC 68 |
| Year | 2025 |
| Court | Family Court |
| Counsel | Ms Jessica Lee |
| Date | 31 March 2025 |
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWFC 68
Case No: ZC120/24
IN THE FAMILY COURT
SITTING AT THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Date: 31/03/2025
Before:
MR JUSTICE MACDONALD
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
C and D Applicant
- and -
E Respondent
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ms Jessica Lee (instructed by NGA Law) for the Applicants
The Respondent did not appear and was not represented
Hearing dates: 24 February 2025
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Approved Judgment
This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 31 March 2025 by circulation to the
parties or their representatives by e-mail.
MR JUSTICE MACDONALD
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the
judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment)
in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their
family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media and
legal bloggers, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so may
be a contempt of court.
MR JUSTICE MACDONALD
Approved Judgment
C and D v E (International Surrogacy and Domestic Adoption)
[2025] EWFC 68
Mr Justice MacDonald:
INTRODUCTION
1. The international adoption of children is closely regulated by both international and
domestic legal instruments. In the case of a child habitually resident in one
Contracting State to the Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and
Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (hereafter the “1993 Hague
Convention”) who has been, is being or is to be moved to another Contracting State,
either after his or her adoption in the State of origin or for the purposes of such an
adoption in the receiving State or in the State of origin, international adoption, is
regulated by that 1993 Hague Convention. Non-convention overseas adoptions are
regulated in this jurisdiction by the Adoption (Recognition of Overseas Adoptions)
Order 2013 and, where not covered by the Adoption (Recognition of Overseas
Adoptions) Order 2013, by the common law. There is a clear domestic statutory
regime governing domestic adoptions of foreign children brought into the jurisdiction
of England and Wales for the purposes of adoption.
2. The international surrogacy1 of children does not, at present, benefit from a similarly
comprehensive international and domestic legal regime. This case raises issues
regarding the operation of the domestic statutory regime governing adoptions of
foreign children brought into the jurisdiction of England and Wales in the context of
international surrogacy.
3. The court is concerned with an application by C and D for an adoption order under
s.50 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 (hereafter “the 2002 Act”) in respect of
G, a child born by way of surrogacy in March 2022 in the jurisdiction of the United
States of America. The applicants are represented by Ms Jessica Lee of counsel and
her instructing solicitor, Ms Natalie Gamble. The respondent surrogate mother, E,
does not appear and is not represented. Given the issues raised in this case, the court
invited the Secretary of State for Education to intervene in this matter. On 31 January
2025, following consultation with the Department of Health and Social Care (which
has policy responsibility for surrogacy), the Secretary of State for Education declined
to intervene in the proceedings.
4. In dealing with the issues that arise in this case, I have had the considerable assistance
of a comprehensive Skeleton Argument prepared on behalf of the applicants by Ms
Lee and Ms Gamble, together with a court bundle of relevant documentation. Given
the issues raised in this matter, I reserved judgment and now set out my decision and
the reasons for it.
5. Finally, by way of introduction, the court is acutely aware of the emotional toll on the
applicants of the need for the court to investigate the complex legal issues that arise
from the circumstances of G’s conception and arrival in this jurisdiction, and to
examine the appropriateness or otherwise in the circumstances of this case of an
adoption order being made in respect of a much wanted and much loved child.
Nothing that is said in this judgment, including the observations made in it regarding
1 Surrogacy being defined by s.1(2) of the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 as “a woman who carries a child
in pursuance of an arrangement made before she began to carry the child, and made with a view to any child
carried in pursuance of it being handed over to, and parental responsibility being met (so far as practicable) by,
another person or other person”.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting