Application of "M" and "S" [2004] NSWSC 203

Application of "M" and "S" [2004] NSWSC 203

Although not bound by the stricter limitation in s101 Adoption Act 2000 due to transitional provisions, the court found the best interests of the child were served by modifying the first name as sought by the adoptive parents and adding the proposed third forename. The policies underlying s101 and identity preservation were considered, but the circumstances (nature of name change, adoptive parents' efforts to preserve cultural links, and DOCS's knowledge and consent) justified the change.

Parties
Applicants: "M" and "S"; Respondent: Department of Community Services
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Adoption Application / Chamber Application—determination of Orders Regarding Change of Child's Name
Outcome
Name changes approved
Legal Topics
Adoption, Name of Child, Change to Name of Child, Intercountry Adoption
Family Law Adoption Name of Child Change to Name of Child Intercountry Adoption

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

"M" and "S"

Applicants

Department of Community Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Adoption Application / Chamber Application—determination of Orders Regarding Change of Child's Name

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adoption is governed by the Adoption of Children Act 1965 or the Adoption Act 2000
  2. 2 Whether alteration of the child's first forename is in his best interests
  3. 3 Whether addition of a new third forename connected with the adoptive family is in the child's best interests

Ratio Decidendi

Although not bound by the stricter limitation in s101 Adoption Act 2000 due to transitional provisions, the court found the best interests of the child were served by modifying the first name as sought by the adoptive parents and adding the proposed third forename. The policies underlying s101 and identity preservation were considered, but the circumstances (nature of name change, adoptive parents' efforts to preserve cultural links, and DOCS's knowledge and consent) justified the change.

Court Disposition

Name changes approved

Orders

  • Order that the child be known by the names sought by the adoptive parents.