Court allows adoptee to keep surname he grew up with

The Family Court has ruled that an adopted man who for the past 36 years used Borg as his surname, should keep using the same surname even though a previous court had ruled that he should take his mother's surname.

The mix-up of surnames came to light when the man, 36, called at the police records office and realised his surname on official documents was Grima. The man had taken Borg as his surname, believing his father was the man who had been married to his mother. The couple had since separated.

A notarial search confirmed in 1985, following the couple's marriage, the husband declared that he was adopting his wife's eight-year old son as his own. The boy was given the husband's surname and documents at the Public Registry showed the son had been 'legitimised through marriage'.

However, unknown to the boy, a judgement handed down in May 1982 had confirmed the child's natural father as having the surname Grima.

Years later, the couple separated and the man who had taken the boy as his own filed a civil suit demanding that his name be struck off the child's records. His claim was upheld in 1997, when the court ordered that the man's details to stop appearing on the boy's records. However, his passport and Identity Card were still issued with his surname showing as Borg.

The plaintiff grew up oblivious to all the legal and administrative changes relating to his name, and always used Borg as his surname. Now a man, he realised he should have been using Grima as his surname rather than Borg, but was never notified or instructed to do so. The change should have taken place 15 years ago when the Civil Court decreed that his mother's former husband was not his natural father.

The man claimed that a change in surname, at 36, would have dire consequences on him, affecting his academic certificates amongst other factors.

Mr Justice Robert Mangion described this as a very rare case, saying the plaintiff had becomes the victim of very particular and unfortunate circumstances. Considering the difficulties the man would now face, the court held that although administrative issues might surface, the plaintiff should be allowed to continue using Borg as his surname.

The court ordered the Public Registrar to note its decision on the man's birth certificate.