Published 23 March 2021
Application for adoption — maternal aunt — intercountry adoption — fragile state — evidence of age and identity — baptismal certificate — DNA evidence — welfare and best interests of child — Adoption (Inter-Country) Act 1997 — Adoption Act 1955, ss 4 & 11 — Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (Hague Adoption Convention) — K v The Attorney-General (2006) FRNZ 413. This was an application for the adoption of four children from Ethiopia. The applicant, who had been born in Ethiopia, claimed she was the children's aunt. The children were born in Sudan but were living in Ethiopia with another aunt. The children's parents were presumed dead, as they had fled to Eritrea and had not been heard from in over five years; however, given the the instability of the countries, there was a possibility they were still alive. Although this was an international adoption application, the Adoption (Intercountry) Act ("AIA") did not apply as Ethiopia is not a signatory to the Hague Adoption Convention. The Adoption Act ("the Act") applied; however, the principles of the AIA could be taken into consideration when considering an adoption. The main issues for determination were the identity of the children and whether an adoption was justified in the circumstances. Usually in adoption applications, a birth certificate is required to be produced, and the child to be present, to ensure that the correct child is being adopted. Sudan, where the children had been born, and Ethiopia, where the children were living, are ranked high in the Fragile States Index and no birth certificates had been issued for the children. Copies of baptismal certificates were adduced as evidence to support the children's identity and ages but there were issues around the certificates such that the Judge was not satisfied that the certificates established the children's identity to the required standard. Authorities have noted that caution is required where relying on baptismal certificates as documentation fraud is not uncommon in fragile states. The applicant had also not provided DNA evidence to establish that she was related to the children by blood, and her partner had not filed any evidence in support of the application. The children had a close relationship with the aunt with whom they were living in Ethiopia, as she had been caring for them for many years. Given the children's ages and the fact that they did not speak English, the Judge noted that it would be difficult for them to integrate into New Zealand life. Adoption is granted for the purpose of setting children up with a stable loving family in which they can flourish. The children already had a tight-knit family in Ethiopia, and the Judge did not consider it was in the welfare and best interests of the children to uproot them to New Zealand. For these reasons the Judge declined to grant an adoption order and the application was dismissed. Judgment date: 6 September 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *
This website explains many of the things you might want to know if you are coming to the Youth Court, or just wondering how the Youth Court works.
Visit website›Ministry of Justice website with information on family issues including about going to court, forms and other times when you may need help.
Visit website›For information about courts and tribunals, including going to court, finding a court & collection of fines and reparation.
Visit website›On this site you will find information about our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court including recent decisions, daily lists and news.
Visit website›