Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Final Hearing tomorrow..
- Thread starter DannyK
- Start date
am thinking of going for this myself now.... Shell will never expect it. That said, my solicitor won't eitherThanks @coggers1980
My barrister used the following case law / argument in relation to the change of surname:
- The leading case is Dawson and Wearmouth [1999] 2 AC 308 (in the absence of paragraph numbering, the relevant paragraphs relied upon are highlighted) where Lord Mackay of Clashfern made it clear that in respect of a change of a child’s name: There has to be ‘some evidence that it would lead to an improvement in the child’s life.’ Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle in his judgment stated: ‘A surname which is given to a child at birth is not simply a name plucked out of the air. Where the parents are married the child will normally be given the surname or patronymic of the father thereby demonstrating its relationship to him. The surname is thus a biological label which tells the world at large that the blood of the name flows in its veins...’
- In Re W (a child) (Illegitimate Child: Change of Surname) [2001] Fam 1 at paragraph 9 Lady Justice Butler Sloss gave guidance on this narrow area of law. It is submitted the paragraphs relevant to this case are :
‘e. On any application the welfare of the child is paramount and the judge must have regard to the section 1 (3) criteria.
f. Among the factors to which the court should have regard is the registered surname of the child and the reasons for the registration, for instance recognition of the biological link with the child’s father. Registration is always a relevant and an important consideration but it is not in itself decisive. The weight to be given to it by the court will depend upon the other relevant factors or valid countervailing reasons which may tip the balance the other way.
g. The relevant considerations should include factors which may arise in the future as well as the present situation.
h. Reasons given for changing or seeking to change a child’s name based on the fact that the child’s name is or is not the same as the parent making the application do not generally carry much weight.
i. The reasons for an earlier unilateral decision to change a child’s name may be relevant.
j. Any changes of circumstances of the child since the original registration may be relevant.
l. Where the child’s parents were not married to each other, the mother has control over registration. Consequently on an application to change the surname of the child, the degree of commitment of the father to the child, the quality of contact, if it occurs, between father and child, the existence or absence of parental responsibility are all relevant factors to take into account.’
37. It is Father’s case that Mother has not provided any evidence of how a change of surname will benefit ***** rather than Mother. Father is concerned the ***** part of the surname may be dropped by Mother. He relies on the latter case as authority that ***** not having the same surname as Mother should not carry weight with the court’s decision.
Perfect thanks. I'd seen it already but wasn't sure about how it applied to double barrel names.Thanks @coggers1980
My barrister used the following case law / argument in relation to the change of surname:
- The leading case is Dawson and Wearmouth [1999] 2 AC 308 (in the absence of paragraph numbering, the relevant paragraphs relied upon are highlighted) where Lord Mackay of Clashfern made it clear that in respect of a change of a child’s name: There has to be ‘some evidence that it would lead to an improvement in the child’s life.’ Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle in his judgment stated: ‘A surname which is given to a child at birth is not simply a name plucked out of the air. Where the parents are married the child will normally be given the surname or patronymic of the father thereby demonstrating its relationship to him. The surname is thus a biological label which tells the world at large that the blood of the name flows in its veins...’
- In Re W (a child) (Illegitimate Child: Change of Surname) [2001] Fam 1 at paragraph 9 Lady Justice Butler Sloss gave guidance on this narrow area of law. It is submitted the paragraphs relevant to this case are :
‘e. On any application the welfare of the child is paramount and the judge must have regard to the section 1 (3) criteria.
f. Among the factors to which the court should have regard is the registered surname of the child and the reasons for the registration, for instance recognition of the biological link with the child’s father. Registration is always a relevant and an important consideration but it is not in itself decisive. The weight to be given to it by the court will depend upon the other relevant factors or valid countervailing reasons which may tip the balance the other way.
g. The relevant considerations should include factors which may arise in the future as well as the present situation.
h. Reasons given for changing or seeking to change a child’s name based on the fact that the child’s name is or is not the same as the parent making the application do not generally carry much weight.
i. The reasons for an earlier unilateral decision to change a child’s name may be relevant.
j. Any changes of circumstances of the child since the original registration may be relevant.
l. Where the child’s parents were not married to each other, the mother has control over registration. Consequently on an application to change the surname of the child, the degree of commitment of the father to the child, the quality of contact, if it occurs, between father and child, the existence or absence of parental responsibility are all relevant factors to take into account.’
37. It is Father’s case that Mother has not provided any evidence of how a change of surname will benefit ***** rather than Mother. Father is concerned the ***** part of the surname may be dropped by Mother. He relies on the latter case as authority that ***** not having the same surname as Mother should not carry weight with the court’s decision.