Rennick & Yardman

In the matter of *Rennick & Yardman*, heard before Judge Scarlett, the applicant mother sought leave to proceed ex parte and to change the registered name of her child, X. The core of the dispute concerned the mother's unilateral application to alter the child's name, without the consent of the respondent father.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the applicant leave to proceed ex parte, thereby dispensing with the need for the respondent's consent or participation in the proceedings. Furthermore, the court had to consider the legal basis for authorising the change of the child's name under section 28 of the *Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995* (NSW), particularly in circumstances where the consent of one parent was absent.

Judge Scarlett granted leave to proceed ex parte, acknowledging the circumstances necessitating this procedural step. The court then ordered that the name of the child X be changed to the name sought by the applicant. This order was made pursuant to section 28 of the *Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995* (NSW), authorising the applicant mother to apply to the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages to effect the change. The Registrar was consequently ordered to register the child's new name, notwithstanding the lack of the respondent's consent.