Recent judgments from the family courts demonstrate the evolving legal approach to surrogacy arrangements in the UK. These cases highlight the courts’ emphasis on:
- safeguarding children’s lifelong welfare needs
- ensuring legal parentage reflects intended family structures and
- addressing practical considerations such as parental responsibility and future care and estate planning.
Three notable decisions from 2024 and 2025 illustrate how the judiciary is adapting established principles to meet the complex realities of modern surrogacy arrangements.
Father and another v Z and another [2024] EWFC 225
In this landmark case, a parental order was granted in favour of a separated couple following a surrogacy arrangement in the United States. This is the first reported case where a parental order was granted despite one applicant withdrawing from active participation in proceedings.
The child, X, now ten, had lived with the father (F) since January 2023. The parents had previously separated following an incident of domestic abuse by the mother (M). Nevertheless, in August 2023, the parents jointly applied for a parental order. While M had been disengaged from proceedings for ten months from November 2023, it was held that the application remained valid under section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, emphasising a purposive approach and allowing the late application to proceed.
The court found no indication that M had withdrawn her consent, and the application was still deemed to be made by two people. A parental order was granted outside of the normal six-month time limit to secure X’s legal parentage and welfare under the Adoption and Children Act 2002, and in line with Article 8 rights under the ECHR. A subsequent child arrangements order was made for X to live with F, with M’s contact suspended for three months due to emotional harm. F was granted decision-making authority, with limited exceptions.
YW v A [2024] EWHC 3548 (Fam)
Despite this, the court found that the threshold for refusing a parental order on public policy grounds was not met. There had been no domestic abuse in YW’s current relationship, and the children’s guardian supported the application. Welfare considerations strongly favoured granting the order, especially since P would otherwise remain legally tied to the surrogate mother, A, and lack legal recognition of XW as a parent.
The court also considered the importance of family unity, P had a full genetic sibling carried by XW, and denying the parental order would create legal incongruence between the siblings. Granting of the order secured P’s lifelong welfare needs, legal identity, and family life under Article 8 ECHR.
Mr and Mrs K v Mr and Mrs Z [2025] EWHC 927 (Fam)
In this case, a parental order was granted to commissioning parents in their seventies who had entered into a surrogacy arrangement over in the US.
Their child, B, was born using the father’s sperm and a donor egg. Though the applicants met all legal and welfare criteria under section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 and section 1 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, the judge raised concerns about long-term care planning due to the couple’s older age, namely observing that they would both be 89 years old when B turned 18. It was therefore foreseeable that the parents’ health may decline, resulting in one or both of them becoming incapacitated or dying whilst B was still a child, which they had initially given little thought to.
As such, the court prompted them to prepare appropriate plans, including wills, lasting powers of attorney, and detailed financial and care arrangements. Satisfied that B’s lifelong welfare would now be secured, the court made the parental order.
Importantly, Justice Knowles has used this case to expand on guidance for all surrogacy applicants, not just those using overseas arrangements, emphasising the need for early estate and future care planning. She urges older or single commissioning parents to set out such plans clearly in their applications and calls on parental order reporters to specifically inquire into such plans at an early stage.
Summary
In conclusion, these cases underscore the UK judiciary’s commitment to adapting legal frameworks to accommodate the diverse realities of modern families. By focusing on the child’s welfare and the intentions of all parties involved, the courts continue to provide guidance on navigating the complexities of alternative family arrangements.
