header-logo header-logo

Fertile ground

13 November 2015 / Kirstie Gibson
Issue: 7676 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
nlj_7676_gibson

Kirstie Gibson considers the court’s approach to the acquisition of parenthood

The recent decision of the President of the Family Division in Re Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Cases A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H) [2015] EWHC 2602 (Fam), [2015] All ER (D) 57 (Sep) highlights the serious repercussions of non-compliance with the requirements for obtaining consent to parenthood and provides a useful reminder of the steps that fertility clinics must take.

The applicants were parents of children conceived following fertility treatment at various clinics. Each applicant had, at the time of the birth of their child, understood that they were the parent of their child. They thought they had complied with the legal requirements to acquire parenthood. Unfortunately due to the administrative incompetence of the clinics, that was not the case.

Re Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Cases A–H) raised questions as to the extent of the regulatory powers of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in allowing such administrative incompetence to exist in relation to, what Munby P

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll