T AND ANOTHER v. N AND OTHERS

HCMP 797/2021

[2022] HKCFI 2150

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 797 OF 2021

_______________________

______________________

______________________

______________________

REASONS

(Final Orders)

______________________

Introduction

1.  On 16 March 2022, this Court has handed down an earlier judgment in this application (“Judgment”). I shall follow the abbreviations and nomenclature in the Judgment, unless otherwise indicated herein.

2.  Pursuant to the Judgment, the originating summons was adjourned with the following directions:

(1)  The Director of Social Welfare to submit a supplemental social investigation report within two months after the minor B’s arrival in Hong Kong and completion of quarantine requirements, if any, and such report should include observation and investigation made of B being seen with the Applicants physically;

(2)  The Director of Social Welfare to submit a supplemental suitability assessment report within two months after B’s arrival in Hong Kong and completion of quarantine requirements, if any, and to include whether the Applicants have any previous criminal records;

(3)  Leave to the Official Solicitor to submit a supplemental report, if deemed necessary, within two months after B’s arrival in Hong Kong and completion of quarantine requirements if any.

(4)  The originating summons was adjourned for a further short hearing after the loding of a supplemental social investigation report, a supplemental suitability assessment report and any supplemental report from the Official Solicitor;

3.  After the Judgment, and upon B obtaining the HKSAR passport and the Hong Kong Identity Card, the Applicants flew to Georgia on 22 March 2022 to bring B to Hong Kong, and all three of them arrived in Hong Kong on 30 March 2022.  They stayed in a quarantine hotel until 23:59 on 12 April 2022.

4.  Thereafter, the Director of Social Welfare submitted a supplemental information report from their Adoption Unit (“Adoption Report”) on 7 June 2022, and a supplemental social investigation report (“SSIR”) on 8 June 2022.

5.  At the resumed hearing, I granted the orders sought by the Applicants.  The reasons are set out hereinafter.

The Adoption Report

6.  The social work officer has in the Adoption Report provided updated criminal record checks on the Applicants on 25 April 2022, and the two Certificates of No Criminal Conviction received from the Commissioner of Police 26 May 2022 showed that the Applicants did not have any criminal record in Hong Kong as at that date.

The SSIR

7.  The social work officer Ms Shum reported that the Applicants stayed in Georgia for about a week to have more contact with B in order to address to B’s sense of security when removed from the Nannies.  The Applicants reported that B soon became attached to them and that after he arrived in Hong Kong, his emotion was reported to be stable and he had adjusted well to his new environment.

8.  Upon leaving the quarantine hotel, the Applicants booked an appointment at a government child health centre for B’s medical needs and his immunization and health records were checked, and that B had been arranged to have follow up on the required immunization.

9.  Ms Shum had conduced a total of 3 home visits to observe the interaction among B, the Applicants and also B’s grandmother and aunts and to observe B’s care condition.  It was observed that B had interacted well with all his family members spontaneously.

10.  Ms Shum concludes that the Applicants have good marital relationship and good extended family relationship.  After B’s arrival in Hong Kong, the Applicants have proved their capability to be responsible parents with qualified and knowledgeable parenting skills and could attend to B’s developmental needs.  Further, with their love and attentive care, B has developed certain attachment to them and to their extended family and that the bonding has been building up.

11.  It is Ms Shum’s conclusion and recommendation that it is in B’s lifelong perspective of welfare for the Applicants to legalize their parental right of B.

Conclusion

12.  Having considered all the reports including the two new reports, and the Adoption Checklist factors, I am satisfied that it is in the best interests of B for the following orders to be made, which I have made at the hearing:

(1)  Time for the Applicants to apply for a parental order under section 12(1) of the PCO be extended for 2 months;

(2)  B be regarded in law as the child of the Applicants;

(3)  The payments made by the Applicants for the surrogacy arrangements of B be authorized retrospectively under section 12(7) of the PCO.

(4)  The Registrar of the High Court to notify the Registrar of the Births and Deaths of the making of this order under section 12 (9) of the PCO.

(5)  There be no order as to costs including all costs reserved.