The regulation directly affects people performing counselling functions under the Surrogacy Act 2010, including counsellors involved in domestic arrangements, international arrangements and independent counsellors’ reports under Act s 17. The relevant provisions impose different eligibility tests, so the same professional qualification may not, by itself, establish eligibility for every function. Section 6 also expressly applies to a counsellor preparing an assessment report under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2007, s 15A.

It also matters to people involved in surrogacy arrangements who need counselling functions performed under the Act. The regulation determines which professional categories and experience criteria qualify a counsellor for those functions. However, the supplied text does not state who must obtain counselling, how many sessions are required, or what the broader legal consequences are if a person does not satisfy a counselling requirement. Those issues require the relevant provisions of the Act and any other applicable law.

The interstate-order provisions are relevant to people whose parentage status or surrogacy arrangements involve an order or law from another Australian jurisdiction. They identify which statutory orders are treated as interstate parentage orders and which laws are classified as interstate surrogacy laws for the Act’s definitions. The practical consequences of that classification are not set out here.

The regulation may also be relevant to fertility-service providers, counsellor practices and organisations arranging counselling or reports. In particular, the note to s 6 links the counsellor qualification rules to assessment reports under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2007, s 15A. The supplied text does not impose a separate general licensing scheme on those organisations.

The central requirements are eligibility conditions for counsellors, rather than a general list of duties owed by intended parents, surrogates or service providers. For a domestic surrogacy arrangement, s 6 requires the counsellor to hold a university-issued qualification following the equivalent of at least three years’ full-time study. The person must also have specialised knowledge, based on training, study or experience, of the social and psychological implications of surrogacy. In addition, the person must fit at least one of four professional categories: a psychiatrist registered in that specialty; a psychologist; a person eligible for membership of the Australian Association of Social Workers or the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers; or a full member of, or person eligible for full membership of, the Australian and New Zealand Infertility Counsellors Association.

For an international arrangement, s 7 permits either compliance with s 6 or an alternative. Under the alternative, the person must meet s 6(a) and (b), and be authorised under a law outside Australia to practise as a psychiatrist or psychologist, or to undertake social work. This is not a general waiver of the education and specialist-knowledge requirements.

Section 8 adds a requirement for a counsellor exercising functions under Act s 17: the person must meet s 6 or s 7 and have specialised knowledge enabling them to give opinion evidence about the matters referred to in Act s 17. The note points to Evidence Act 1995, s 79. The regulation does not set out the matters in Act s 17 or the full operation of the evidence rule. It also does not confer express rights on parties or specify a remedy for an unmet qualification requirement.

The supplied regulation contains no express offence, penalty unit, fine, imprisonment term, enforcement power, inspection power or review process. It would therefore be inaccurate to attribute a particular penalty to breach of ss 6-8 on the basis of this text alone. The regulation defines who qualifies to exercise specified counselling functions; the consequences of a person acting without the required qualifications would need to be checked against the Surrogacy Act 2010 and any other applicable legislation.

The distinction between a qualification rule and a penalty provision matters. Sections 6-8 state what a person “must” meet to exercise particular functions. That wording establishes a condition of qualification in the regulation, but the extract does not say whether a non-qualifying person’s work is invalid, whether a report can be excluded, whether an offence is committed, or whether another person or body may take enforcement action. Those questions cannot be answered from this instrument alone.

Section 8’s reference to the Evidence Act 1995, s 79 is relevant to opinion evidence, but the regulation does not reproduce that section or determine how a court will treat any particular report or evidence. Likewise, the transitional provisions in s 9 identify which qualification rules apply in specified circumstances; they do not state a penalty for failing to meet those rules.

The regulation’s repeal and savings provision (s 10) preserves the effect of an act, matter or thing that had effect under the 2016 regulation immediately before repeal. That is a continuity rule, not an enforcement mechanism. Any assessment of penalties, regulatory oversight or consequences for a particular report requires the relevant provisions of the Act and any other legal sources applicable to the facts.

The regulation expressly operates through definitions in the Surrogacy Act 2010. Sections 4 and 5 are made “for” the Act’s s 4(1) definitions of interstate parentage order and interstate surrogacy law. Their function is to classify specified external orders and laws for the purposes of those definitions. The regulation does not reproduce the Act’s rules about what follows from those classifications, so the effect of an interstate order in a particular matter cannot be determined from the regulation alone.

The counsellor provisions also connect with other legislation. Section 6’s note says it applies to a counsellor preparing an assessment report in relation to a surrogacy arrangement under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2007, s 15A. Section 8 refers to the Surrogacy Act 2010, s 17 and notes the Evidence Act 1995, s 79 in relation to opinion evidence. The regulation identifies these links but does not set out the underlying statutory procedures or evidentiary test.

The interstate list spans the ACT, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia. It names particular statutes and, for parentage orders, particular sections within them (ss 4-5). The time-qualified references in s 4 mean the exact version or historical status of the referenced provision may matter. The supplied text does not give the full interstate statutes or explain how each jurisdiction’s orders are made.

Section 2 also refers to the Subordinate Legislation Act 1989, s 10(2), as the provision under which the 2016 regulation otherwise would have been repealed on 1 September 2026. The regulation’s own s 10 then repeals that earlier instrument and preserves specified existing effects. These references establish connections, not a complete account of the other laws.

The supplied text identifies the instrument as the Surrogacy Regulation 2026 and states in s 10(1) that it repeals the Surrogacy Regulation 2016. Section 2 explains that the 2016 regulation otherwise would have been repealed on 1 September 2026 under the Subordinate Legislation Act 1989, s 10(2). The 2026 regulation therefore replaces the earlier instrument, but the extract does not include a comparison of their provisions or establish which requirements have changed in substance.

Section 9 records a relevant earlier change: the Surrogacy Amendment (Qualified Counsellors) Regulation 2025. For counsellors engaged before 2 July 2025, the 2016 regulation’s clauses 6 and 7, as they stood before that date, continue to apply (s 9(1)). For international surrogacy arrangements entered into before 2 July 2025, ss 7 and 8 of the present regulation apply to a person engaged to perform qualified-counsellor functions (s 9(2)). “Engaged” includes booking an initial appointment with the counsellor (s 9(3)). That express inclusion makes the date of an initial booking potentially material to the transition rule.

Section 10(2) provides that an act, matter or thing which had effect under the 2016 regulation immediately before repeal continues to have effect under the 2026 regulation. This is a savings provision. It prevents the mere repeal from automatically ending the effect of qualifying pre-existing matters, although the extract does not define every matter that may fall within that wording.

The text does not provide an explanatory statement, amendment table, commencement publication date, or full history of changes. No broader claim about legislative purpose or the degree of change between the 2016 and 2026 instruments can be established from this extract.

The supplied regulation contains no case names, court or tribunal decisions, litigation summaries, or references to judicial interpretation. That means this source does not establish whether any dispute has tested the meaning or operation of ss 4-10. It would not support a conclusion that there has been no litigation; it supports only the narrower statement that litigation history is not provided in the text supplied.

The provisions that could give rise to questions of interpretation include the boundaries of “engaged” in s 9, the scope of the savings phrase “act, matter or thing” in s 10(2), and the application of the time-qualified interstate-order descriptions in s 4. The text resolves one point expressly: “engaged” includes booking an initial appointment with the counsellor (s 9(3)). It does not offer equivalent examples for the savings provision or explain how to determine the status of every cross-border order.

Section 8 refers to expert opinion evidence and Evidence Act 1995, s 79. That reference signals an evidentiary connection, but the extract gives no decision applying either provision to an independent counsellor’s report. Nor does it establish whether a court has considered the relationship between counsellor qualifications under this regulation and admissibility, weight or other treatment of evidence.

A litigation analysis would need case materials and the full text of the Act and the cited evidence legislation, as well as the relevant version of the interstate law where an order is involved. On the available source, no outcome, judicial trend or settled interpretation can responsibly be reported.

The commencement date is not stated as a calendar date. Section 2 says commencement occurs on the day the regulation is published on the NSW legislation website. The title “2026” does not, by itself, establish when publication occurred or when the rules began operating. The note about the 2016 regulation’s scheduled repeal gives a date for that earlier instrument’s otherwise-applicable repeal, not the publication date of this regulation.

The qualification pathways are function-specific. Sections 6 and 7 concern counselling for domestic and international arrangements; s 8 adds a separate specialised-knowledge requirement for a counsellor exercising functions under Act s 17. A person meeting the general education and professional-category tests may still need the additional opinion-evidence capability for an independent counsellor’s report. Conversely, s 8 does not set out the underlying matters in Act s 17.

Transition dates require care. Section 9 distinguishes engagement before 2 July 2025 from an international arrangement entered into before that date. It also defines engagement to include booking an initial appointment. The extract does not explain how to resolve every possible combination, such as a booking before the date followed by a later change of counsellor, or an arrangement date that differs from the date counselling began.

Interstate order references are not all simple current-version references. Section 4 specifies historical versions for the ACT s 26 and South Australian s 10HB orders. The exact provision and relevant date may therefore matter. Finally, the regulation’s silence on penalties, invalidity and remedies should not be mistaken for proof that no such consequences exist elsewhere. They are not specified in this instrument.

The regulation’s compliance framework can be read as a sequence of classification questions, rather than as one uniform checklist for every person involved in surrogacy. First, identify the function being performed and whether the arrangement is domestic or international. Sections 6 and 7 use different eligibility pathways. For a domestic arrangement, the stated elements are a qualifying university qualification, specialised knowledge of the social and psychological implications of surrogacy, and at least one listed professional status. For an international arrangement, s 7 permits either the s 6 route or its specified overseas-authorisation route.

Second, identify whether the counsellor is performing a function under Act s 17. If so, s 8 requires the person to meet s 6 or s 7 and to have specialised knowledge enabling opinion evidence about the matters in Act s 17. The extract does not define those matters, so the statutory cross-reference needs to be read with the Act.

Third, check whether the transitional rules are relevant. The engagement date, the date of any initial appointment booking, and, for an international arrangement, the date the arrangement was entered into may affect which rules apply under s 9. Section 9(1) preserves the earlier clauses for qualifying pre-2 July 2025 engagements; s 9(2) applies ss 7 and 8 to qualifying international arrangements entered into before that date.

For an interstate issue, identify whether the question concerns a parentage order or a law, then compare the instrument and provision with the lists in ss 4 and 5. The regulation does not provide a complete compliance process for intended parents, surrogates, clinics or counsellors, nor does it state penalties. Any operational assessment therefore depends on the full Act and other applicable sources. This is general legal information, not legal advice. Zoe can make mistakes. Before acting on this, relying on it, or using any draft, have it checked by a qualified Australian lawyer.