Judgment, 22 July 1987.

The Court held that a husband who, after intensive advice and warning, signs a waiver of his right to contest the legitimacy of a child born through artificial insemination of his wife with the semen of another man must be held to the waiver. It pointed to the extensive counseling received by the husband, concluding that his behavior constituted exceptional circumstances that were against faith and credit, and it noted the difficulties that would be encountered by the child because it would not know the identity of its father. On this basis, it distinguished its decision from the 1983 judgment of the Federal High Court, which had allowed a husband to contest the paternity of a child born through artificial insemination.