The Supreme Court allowed the State’s appeal in a case about who must be recorded as the mother of twins born through a surrogacy arrangement. It held that, under the Civil Registration Act 2004, the woman who gave birth must be registered as their mother at birth. The judgment said its decision was limited to immediate birth registration and did not decide broader questions about surrogacy or parentage.
The twins’ genetic mother and father were married applicants. The genetic mother had a condition that meant she could produce ova but could not carry a pregnancy. Her sister agreed to act as surrogate. After an IVF procedure at a private clinic in Ireland, the sister gave birth to twins in March 2008. The children went home with and were cared for by the applicants.
The father was registered without difficulty. The Chief Registrar refused the applicants’ request to register the genetic mother, saying the woman who gave birth had to be recorded as mother. The birth mother was registered under protest. The applicants then sought to correct the register, but that request was also refused, prompting court proceedings.
The High Court declared that the genetic mother was the twins’ mother under the Status of Children Act 1987 and entitled to be entered on their birth certificates. The State appealed. In the Supreme Court, the applicants argued that legislation on parentage testing meant genetic connection determined maternity. The Court rejected that interpretation, finding that the registration legislation treated the person who gave birth as the mother to be recorded.
The Court also rejected an equality challenge to that approach in the context of immediate registration. It distinguished the case from a prior ruling about an irrebuttable presumption of fatherhood, noting that the female reproductive role can be divided between a genetic mother and a birth mother.
The judgment stressed the limits of its ruling. It did not decide whether surrogacy agreements are valid or enforceable, how parentage should be recognised for other purposes, or what regulations should govern assisted reproduction. It also said the decision should not be taken as resolving broader constitutional issues that could arise if the law fails to recognise genetic parentage beyond initial registration. The judgment called for legislation on assisted reproduction, but left that task to the legislature.