Facts
The applicants, two minor children, requested through their mother as legal representative to change their surname from "[D.] " to "[C.] ", the name of their mother and stepfather. The children's father, the respondent, objected to the application. The cantonal department and the High Court of the Canton of Lucerne dismissed the application, as there were no important reasons for a name change.
The children were placed under the parental care of their mother after the divorce of their parents and bear their father's surname. The mother remarried later and took her new husband's name. The children live with their mother and stepfather and identify with their new family.
The High Court found that the relationship between the children and their father is heavily strained, but that the name change is not suitable to eliminate this strain. The children are caught in a loyalty conflict and are trying to resolve it by radically rejecting their father.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the High Court had overlooked important reasons for a name change. It found that the name change is not suitable to eliminate the strain in the relationship between the children and their father, as the causes of this strain lie deeper and are rooted in the long-standing loyalty conflict.
The court found that the children are not impaired in their psychological and educational development by their surname, but by the unresolved loyalty conflict. The assumption that the name change could provide relief is an illusion. The court also saw no sufficient indications that it is unlikely that the loyalty conflict can be overcome and that a more or less orderly relationship with the father cannot be established.
The Federal Court also…