File photo. Image: Alamy Stock Photo File photo. Image: Alamy Stock Photo THE SUPREME COURT is to hear an appeal against a High Court ruling directing the Minister for Foreign Affairs to make a decision on a passport application for a boy whose male parents were told a parent is “understood to mean either the mother or father of the child or a male adopter”.
In his judgement last year Mr Justice Max Barrett found that the boy is an Irish citizen under our citizenship law following a challenge over a refusal to issue a passport for him by his parents, referred to as Mr A and Mr B. Mr B then applied to the England Family Court for a Parental Order under the UK’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, the effect of which they say was to reassign parentage of the child from Mr B and the birth mother to Mr B and Mr A.Mr A has Irish and UK citizenship while his husband is a UK citizen, which meant Mr A was entitled to apply for a passport for his child.
The parents made further submissions on the application the office, but ultimately no decision was taken. He found that because the men were regarded as a matter of UK law to be the parents, following their application to the Family Court there, it followed that Mr A, who has Irish citizenship, is now recognized as the other parent for the purposes of Section 7 of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, which means the boy has been an Irish citizen since birth.
Mr A is not the father of that kid nor blood related to him in any way whatsoever, so the kid is not entitled to an Irish passport. There ya go, job done.