header-logo header-logo

15 February 2013
Issue: 7548 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family proceedings

Re G (a child) (sperm donor: contact order); Re Z (a child) (sperm donor: contact order) [2013] EWHC 134 (Fam), [2013] All ER (D) 19 (Feb)

When considering an application by a biological father for leave to apply for an order under s 8 of the Children Act 1989 Act in respect of a child conceived using his sperm by a woman who, at the time of her artificial insemination, was party to a civil partnership, the reforms implemented in ss 42, 45 and 48 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, and the policy underpinning those reforms, namely to put lesbian couples and their children in exactly the same legal position as other types of parent and children, were relevant factors to be taken into account by the court, alongside all other relevant considerations, including the factors identified in s 10(9) of the 1989 Act. In some cases, the reforms, and the policy underpinning those reforms, would be decisive. Each case was, however, fact specific. The position of a lesbian couple who had been granted

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll