MR JUSTICE John Hedigan was giving his reserved judgment on proceedings for guardianship and access brought by the man, aged in his early 40s, against the lesbian couple.
The women had planned to take the child abroad for a year to a long-haul destination of which his mother is a native but the man secured a High Court injunction restraining that until the man's claims were decided by the High Court. The couple appealed that decision but the Supreme Court last July dismissed their appeal by a 2-1 majority.
The majority Supreme Court ruled the injunction was in the best interests of the child's welfare at that stage, as a year was a long time in the life of a developing infant, but stressed that decision should not be inferred as presuming rights for the man which had yet to be decided. Disagreeing, Mr Justice Nial Fennelly said the man's only relationship with the child was as "a sperm donor".
The guardianship proceedings were then heard by the High Court. Mr Justice Hedigan found the lesbian couple discussed arrangements with the man for him to father a child with one of them by artificial insemination.
The judge said he preferred the couple's consistent evidence in relation to events around August 2005, when one of the women became pregnant as opposed to the man's confused and contradictory account.
He also noted the couple had said they had set out very clearly to the man that he would have no parenting role and that the couple and the child would form a firm family unit with the man's role as a favourite uncle.
A signed contract "agreement on sperm donation" was reached between them in September 2005. He found the agreement enforceable only to the extent that the child's welfare was protected.
The judge said that when the baby was born, the man seemed to see himself in the role of a new father rather than the uncle role envisaged by the couple and agreed.
The couple were concerned he was intruding on their family life. They raised their concerns with the man and relations deteriorated. The judge said he believed the man had misled the couple as to the role which he saw himself playing in any child's life and had not admitted his true intentions.