HAFNER & FURLOW

In *Hafner & Furlow*, heard before Judge Mercuri, the applicant father sought permission to change his child's name. The dispute arose because the child's birth registration had been completed with only the mother's signature, due to the father's initial refusal to sign the Birth Registration Statement pending DNA testing. The father subsequently sought to change the child's name, citing distress caused by the child carrying the middle name of the maternal grandfather with whom he has a fractured relationship.

The court was required to determine whether to permit the father's application to change the child's name. This involved considering the father's stated reasons for the change, the impact of the child's current name on his relationship with his son, and whether the mother's opposition to the change was based on a genuine concern or a recent construction. The court also had to consider the circumstances surrounding the initial birth registration and the delays that occurred.

Judge Mercuri reasoned that the father had a legitimate concern regarding the child's middle name, which he stated caused him distress and could adversely impact his parental relationship. The court accepted the father's evidence that this concern existed since the child's birth, and did not accept the mother's submission that it was a recent construction. The court noted that while the initial registration process was delayed due to the father's request for DNA testing, this did not preclude him from later seeking a name change. The court found that the father's desire to change the name was not motivated by malice or an intent to cause distress to the mother, but rather by a genuine concern for his relationship with his son.

The court ordered that the child, previously known as [X], be known as [X] Furlow-Hafner. The applicant father was directed to apply to the Victorian Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages to register the child's name accordingly and to take all necessary steps to give effect to this registration. A sealed copy of the orders was to be served upon the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages.