Adoption of O – ( Anonymised) [2019] NSWSC 1430

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Adoption of O – ( Anonymised) [2019] NSWSC 1430 Hearing dates: 26 September 2019 Date of orders: 26 September 2019 Decision date: 26 September 2019 Jurisdiction: Equity - Adoptions List Before: Sackar J Decision: Adoption Orders Made Catchwords: ADOPTION - FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE –Adoption- whether adoption in the child's best interests- whether adoption clearly preferable Legislation Cited: Adoption Act 2000 (NSW) Cases Cited: Adoption of Hogarth (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 9 Texts Cited: n/a Category: Principal judgment Parties: Secretary, Department of Communities & Justice (formerly Family and Community Services) (Plaintiff) HO (Defendant) Representation: Solicitors: Crown Solicitors for NSW (Plaintiff) Self represented (Defendant) File Number(s): A169/2018

Judgment

Procedural Background 1. These proceedings concern the proposed adoption of CO, born 12 June 2014. 2. The Secretary, NSW Department of Family and Community Services (now known as the Secretary of the Department of Families, Communities and Justice) by Summons filed 17 September 2018, sought the following orders: 1. That pursuant to Adoption Act 2000 s 67(1)(d), the consent of the child's birth mother, AL be dispensed with. 2. That pursuant to Adoption Act 2000 s 67(1)(d), the consent of the child's birth father, HO "M" be dispensed with. 3. An order for the adoption of the child CO in favour of the adoption parents X and Y E 4. An order approving the name "E" as the surname and CO as the given names of the child 1. At hearing, the birth father appeared in person with the aid of an interpreter. He did not file any evidence. The birth mother did not play any active role in the proceedings. 2. Even though no evidence was filed by the birth father, and there was no written submission or statement provided by him, I was informed at the beginning of the hearing that all issues relating to the adoption formally remained in dispute. However, I was informed that the day before hearing the birth father had emailed Ms Hailstone to inform her of particular issues he wished to raise, specifically regarding C's culture and heritage, as well as to allow C to visit her paternal step-grandmother. A new adoption plan was prepared to take into account some of the birth father's concerns. I briefly heard from the birth father and he reiterated some of the issues that were canvassed in the email. I then took a short adjournment so that the changes in the paternal adoption plan could be explained in detail to the birth father. 3. The birth father then informed me that he still wished to take C to visit his step-mother, that he wished to take her to Church and he wished for her to learn Old Assyrian. 4. There was no cross-examination of any witnesses at the hearing. Following oral submissions from Ms Hailstone, I gave brief reasons ordering the dispensing with consent of the birth parents and the adoption of C in favour of the proposed adoptive parents, as well as an order registering the adoption plans and an order for a name change. I now publish in full my reasons.