- The plaintiff filed this originating summons seeking a declaration that his name in his identity card be changed from Lai AA to Ser AA and a consequential order that the Registration Department gives effect to the order once it is made.
- I allowed the originating summons. I now give my reasons for the decision.
- Arnold Lai BB is the biological father of the plaintiff. His mother, Eunice Tan CC and his father were granted a divorce on 5.11.2007 when he was 4 years old. The plaintiff since then lived and continues to live with his mother. The plaintiff and his father stopped communicating with each other in 2010. The plaintiff was then 8 years old. On 9.3.2014, his mother married Ser DD who moved in and lives with her and the plaintiff at Kuala Lumpur.
- The divorce affected the plaintiff’s childhood as he was brought up without the love, affection and care of his father. The relationship between father and son has deteriorated to the extent that there is nothing left. They are so estranged except by blood and name. On the other hand, the plaintiff has received love and affection from his stepfather who treats him like his own son. The plaintiff has renounced his father’s name and rejected any inheritance from his father and has taken his stepfather’s name “Ser” as his father’s name, his own reasons as it makes him feel inclusive as a family.
- So, he applied under Regulation 14 of the National Registration Regulations 1990 for a change in his name i.e. to show that he goes by the name Chris Jeremy Ser ZA. According to the affidavit of the legal advisor of the department a panel established by the department refused the application made by the plaintiff. No reasons were given by the said panel for refusing the application. As a result of the refusal the plaintiff filed the instant originating summons seeking a declaration with regards to his name he wants to go by.
Analysis and decision
- The reason for the refusal of the application appears to be stated by the legal advisor of the department who affirmed the affidavit in reply for the defendant. The reason is stated in the following paragraphs of the affidavit in reply as follows:
“11. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa nama keluarga yang didaftarkan hendaklah nama bapa kandung dan ini adaiah selaras dengan peruntukkan Seksyen 13A Akta Pendaftaran Kelahiran dan Kematian 1957
- Saya sesungguhnya percaya dan menyatakan bahawa permohonan plaintif untuk menukar nama adaliah tidak dibenarkan dalam peruntukkan undang-undang yang dinyatakan di atas dan tidak memenuhi syarat-syarat yang ditetapkan dalam Akta 299. ”
- The reason given by the legal advisor of the department is misconceived in law. The plaintiff was not applying to change his particulars of his birth certificate. Therefore, Section 13A of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 or any other section therein is not relevant. The Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 concerns the registrations for births or deaths and not the identity card of a citizen. The identity card of a citizen is governed by the National Registration Act 1959. 原告并未申请更改他的出生证明书(报生纸)的个人资料。因此，1957年《出生和死亡登记法》第13A条文或其中的任何其他条文均不相关。1957年《出生和死亡登记法》涉及出生或死亡的登记，而不涉及公民的身份证。公民的身份证由1959年《国民登记法》管理。
- The rejection of the plaintiff’s application by the defendant albeit by the panel was therefore based on a fallacy (荒谬的言论). The defendant cannot now rely on a new reason in submissions with regard to the National Registration Regulations 1990 unless the application of the plaintiff is something prohibited by law. The reliance of such new reason except for illegality would be in bad faith. The defendant is in charge of the National Registration Department and must carry out his functions in good faith. The different reason being proffered now in the written submissions of the defendant is obviously an afterthought and I unhesitatingly disregard the same. In any event, it suffices to say the new reason is not something prohibited by law.
- This is a declaration of the plaintiff’s status or name which the plaintiff is entitled to in law. The law provides that if a citizen is seeking to register his change of name such application must be made pursuant to Regulation 14 of the National Registration Regulations 1990 (made under Section 6 of the National Registration Act 1959). The relevant provisions of regulation 14 provides as follows:
“(1) A person registered under these Regulations who –
(a) changes his name;
shall forthwith report the fact to the nearest registration office and apply for a replacement identity card with the correct particulars.
(2) Any person registered under these Regulations who applies to change his name under subregulation (1) shall submit to the registration officer a statutory declaration which –
(a) certifies the fact that he has absolutely renounced and abandoned the use of his former name and in lieu thereof has assumed a new name; and
(b) contains the reasons of such change of name, other than a conversion of religion.”
- There is nothing in the case at hand that bars the plaintiff in seeking a change of his name in his identity card. The so-called panel cannot stop the plaintiff from doing so. The function is purely administrative as only the compliance of the regulations is required. There is no discretion or power involved in this exercise unless the change in name is prohibited by the regulations. All that person needs to do when he changes his name is to inform the department and apply a change in name according to Regulation 14 read with Regulation 4 of the National Registration Regulations 1990 which read as follows:
“Any person who –
(c) applies for a replacement identity card under regulation 13 or 14, shall –
(aa) forward two copies of his photograph to the registration officer or permit the registration officer to take his photograph, as the case may be;
(bb) submit to all such steps as may be reasonably necessary –
(i) for the taking of his photograph; and
(ii) for the taking and recording of his fingerprints impressions, in accordance with any instructions given by the registration officer; and
(cc)give the following particulars to the registration officer:
(i) his full name as appearing in his Certificate of Birth or such other document, and if he is known by different names, each of such names in full;
(ii) his previous identity card number, if any;
(iii) the full address of his place of residence within Malaysia;
(iv) his race;
(v) his religion;
(vi) his place of birth;
(vii) his date of birth and sex;
(viii) his physical abnormalities, if any;
(ix) his citizenship status, whether a citizen of Malaysia or a citizen of any other country;
(x) particulars of his driving licence, if any;
(xi) particulars of his passport, if any;
(xii) any other particulars as the registration officer may generally or in any particular case consider necessary for the purpose of identification; and
(xiii) any other documentary evidence as the registration officer may consider necessary to support the accuracy of any particulars submitted.
- The plaintiff has sworn a statutory declaration renouncing the use of the name Lai” His reason is that he has disowned (断绝关系) his biological father. Whatever the reason is, so long as it is not illegal, the defendant has to give effect to the change in name sought where all the requirements of Regulation 14 read with Regulation 4 of the National Registration Regulations 1990 are met. Regulation 14(6) raised in the defendant’s submissions is clearly not applicable in the case at hand. I will say nothing more on it.
- The plaintiff is in the circumstances entitled in law to seek a declaration of his right for a change in name by way of originating summons. The plaintiff has already renounced his biological father’s name and goes by the name of Ser In such circumstances the plaintiff is not restricted to the remedy of judicial review. A declaration of his right is the best and efficacious remedy under Section 41 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 which provides as follows:
“Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to the character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in that suit ask for any further relief.”
- In the circumstances, the plaintiff is allowed to change his name in accordance with the said regulations and I so grant the declaration and consequential relief sought.
Source: Chris Jeremy Lai Zhe Ahn v Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara  MLJU 3320. High Court Kuala Lumpur. Amarjeet Singh Serjit Singh J.
*我们的律师楼拥有超过 20 年的执业经验。我们有处理民事纠纷(打官司/法庭诉讼)、商业纠纷、劳工纠纷(工业法庭）、追讨债务、遗产分配、立遗嘱、离婚、抚养权、赡养费、产业分配、领养小孩、拟商业合约、拟雇佣协议、拟买卖合约、银行贷款、法律咨询、法律顾问、等法律事务。全马的案件，我们皆有处理。*We have more than 20 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as civil litigation, commercial disputes, labour disputes (Industrial Court), debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting employment contract, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.
*Wilson Kuek律师是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们的平台每天为无数的平民百姓免费解除各类的法律困扰。
*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice
*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage
*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan.
#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #Klang Legal Firm #Klang Lawyer #KL Lawyer #Kuala Lumpur Lawyer #Chinese Lawyer in Malaysia #Malaysia Lawyer #Litigation Lawyer #Divorce Lawyer #reputable lawyer #trustworthy lawyer
#郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼 #巴生律师楼 #吧生律师楼 #马来西亚华人律师 #懂华文的律师 #懂华语的律师 #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #民事诉讼律师 #民事案律师 #专打官司的律师 #专打官司律师 #工业法庭律师 #劳工法庭律师 #专打离婚案的律师 #专打离婚案律师 #处理离婚的律师 #处理离婚案的律师 #离婚律师 #买卖合约律师 #有经验的律师 #好律师 #专业的律师 #值得信赖的律师 #信得过的律师 #靠得住的律师 #靠谱的律师 #利害的律师 #有信誉的律师 #有声望的律师 #有名声的律师 #出名的律师 #有名的律师 #有实力的律师
#满18岁 #满十八岁 #改名换姓 #改姓 #换姓 #改姓氏 #换姓氏 #JPN拒绝 #JPN反对 #JPN抗辩 #改姓去养父的姓氏 #换姓去养父的姓氏 #改姓去继父的姓氏 #换姓去继父的姓氏
#change surname #step-father #stepfather