|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions >> F v M & Ors  EWHC 3601 (Fam) (10 December 2015)
Cite as:  EWHC 3601 (Fam)
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
|- and -
- and -
The Herts and Essex Fertility Centre
- and -
C by his children's guardian, G
Martha Cover (instructed by Goodman Ray) for the First Respondent
Andrew Powell (instructed by Russell Cooke) for the Second Respondent
Jeremy Ford on behalf of Cafcass Legal for the Children's Guardian
Hearing dates: 24 and 25 November 2015
Crown Copyright ©
Mrs Justice Pauffley :
If no man is treated by virtue of section 35 as the father of the child and no woman is treated by virtue of section 42 as a parent of the child but—
(a) the embryo or the sperm and eggs were placed in W, or W was artificially inseminated, in the course of treatment services provided in the United Kingdom by a person to whom a licence applies,
(b) at the time when the embryo or the sperm and eggs were placed in W, or W was artificially inseminated, the agreed fatherhood conditions (as set out in section 37) were satisfied in relation to a man, in relation to treatment provided to W under the licence,
(c) the man remained alive at that time, and
(d) the creation of the embryo carried by W was not brought about with the man's sperm,
then, subject to section 38(2) to (4), the man is to be treated as the father of the child.
(1) The agreed fatherhood conditions referred to in section 36(b) are met in relation to a man ("M") in relation to treatment provided to W under a licence if, but only if,—
(a)M has given the person responsible a notice stating that he consents to being treated as the father of any child resulting from treatment provided to W under the licence,
(b)W has given the person responsible a notice stating that she consents to M being so treated,
(c)neither M nor W has, since giving notice under paragraph (a) or (b), given the person responsible notice of the withdrawal of M's or W's consent to M being so treated,
(d)W has not, since the giving of the notice under paragraph (b), given the person responsible—
(i) a further notice under that paragraph stating that she consents to another man being treated as the father of any resulting child, or
(ii)a notice under section 44(1)(b) stating that she consents to a woman being treated as a parent of any resulting child, and
(e)W and M are not within prohibited degrees of relationship in relation to each other.
(2)A notice under subsection (1)(a), (b) or (c) must be in writing and must be signed by the person giving it.
(3)A notice under subsection (1)(a), (b) or (c) by a person ("S") who is unable to sign because of illness, injury or physical disability is to be taken to comply with the requirement of subsection (2) as to signature if it is signed at the direction of S, in the presence of S and in the presence of at least one witness who attests the signature.
i) The court can act on parol evidence to establish that a Form WP or a Form PP (the consent forms required by the HFEA to be signed before the treatment both by the woman and her partner) which cannot be found was in fact properly completed and signed before the treatment began;
ii) The court can 'correct' mistakes in a Form WP or a Form PP either by rectification, where the requirements for that remedy are satisfied, or, where the mistake is obvious on the face of the document, by a process of construction without the need for rectification.
iii) A Form IC, (an internal consent form) … , will, if properly completed and signed before the treatment began, meet the statutory requirements without the need for a Form WP or a Form PP.
iv) It follows from this that the court has the same powers to 'correct' a Form IC as it would have to 'correct' a Form WP or a Form PP.