A and B (No.2)

[2003] FMCAfam 530

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

A & B (No.2) [2003] FMCAfam 530

FAMILY LAW – Children – contact – name of child – best interests of the child – use of hyphenated surname proposed – child of school age.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s.65D

Chapman and Palmer (1978) 4 Fam LR 462; FLC 90-510
Beach & Stemmler(1979) FLC 90-692
Mahony & McKenzie (1993) FLC 92-408
Flanagan and Handcock (2001) FLC 93-074

Applicant: M A

Respondent: K E B

File No: PAM 3073 of 2003

Delivered on: 27 November 2003

Delivered at: Parramatta

Hearing date: 24 November 2003

Judgment of: Scarlett FM

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Greenaway

Solicitors for the Applicant: Shaddick Baker & Paull

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Maddox

Solicitors for the Respondent: Ian Harper & Co

ORDERS

1. The child F A born 3 January 1998 is to be known as F J A-B for all purposes.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
PARRAMATTA

PAM 3073 of 2003

M A

Applicant

And

K E B

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. This is an application by the mother of a little girl called F, who was born on 3^rd January 1998, for an order that would permit her to use the hyphenated surname “A-B” for the child, instead of just the surname of “A”. The child currently has the surname of “A”, and this was the name that appears on her birth certificate. “A” is the father’s surname.

2. The father opposes the application. He seeks that the child should retain the surname of “A”, although he conceded through his counsel that the name “B” could be added as one of the child’s given names.

Background

1. The mother and father lived together from 1997 until they separated in August 2001. There is one child of the relationship, F, who was born on 3^rd January 1998. F will reach the age of 6 on 3^rd January next.

2. F lives with her mother. The parties consented to orders on

   
   

   20^th October 2003 that F would live with the mother and the father would have contact. The only matter that they have not been able to agree about is the question of the child’s name.

3. There is no doubt that the child’s name appears on her birth certificate as “A”. It is also clear that, for the most part, the child was known by the name of “A” before the parties separated. The father has annexed to his affidavit a copy of a certificate entitled “Certificate of Namegiving, Appointment of Godparent”, dated 22^nd March 1998, showing that the child was referred to as “F Jane A”. A civil marriage celebrant conducted a ceremony at which the child’s name was publicised to friends and family members. The father described the ceremony “as an alternative to having F christened in a religious service.”[1] Despite the non-religious nature of the service, the parties still appointed a Godparent.

   [1] Father’s affidavit sworn 17 November 2003, paragraph 6

4. The mother…