Facts of the Case

  • A girl born in 1990 was recognized by her mother at birth but gained her father’s surname through legitimationwhen her mother married in 1997.

  • In 2007, after emancipation, the applicant requested a legal name correction—from her ex-father’s surname to her maternal surname.

  • The Tribunal de Grande Instance rejected her request. The Court of Appeal of Bastia upheld the decision in June 2008.

  • She then appealed before the Court of Cassation, which issued the ruling studied here.

To support her request, the applicant submitted proof of using her mother’s name from 1997 to 2007—including school records, cultural activities, mutual insurance, bank documents, and her national ID card. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal held that this wasn’t sufficient to demonstrate a sufficiently long possession of her mother’s surname.  

I. Recognition of Acquiring a Surname by Possession

The Court reaffirms that one can acquire the right to a surname through prolonged usage—citing prior rulings from December 2008 and March 1988 that confirmed this principle. However, it stressed that the duration and nature of possession are not defined by law but fall under the lower courts’ discretion.

A. Criteria for Possession

  • French civil law lacks explicit rules for surname possession.

  • Jurisprudence holds that prolonged usage may grant legal ownership of a name.

  • The Court emphasized the need for lower courts to evaluate both loyalty and effect of this usage.

B. Sovereignty of Lower Courts

  • The Court affirmed that judges of fact (“juges du fond”) have sovereign discretion to determine if possession is genuine and long enough.

  • The Cassation’s role is limited to verifying that these factual findings have a proper legal foundation and are adequately justified—without re-examining the facts.  

II. Exceptional Nature of Name Acquisition by Possession

A. Public Policy vs. Private Interests

  • Surnames are subject to public policy principles of immutability, inalienability, and non-prescription.

  • While private interests are acknowledged—such as in marriage—the law restricts name change through possession due to broader societal concerns.

B. Rigorous Appraisal by Lower Courts

  • Despite nearly 10 years of usage, the applicant’s case was judged insufficient.

    • She had a national ID with her maternal surname.

    • She used the name consistently in banking, education, and daily life.

  • Nonetheless, both courts held that it didn’t meet the threshold for changing the official name—a stance later upheld by the Cour de Cassation.

Final Summary

  • Court of Cassation confirms: surname acquisition by use is legally possible—but duration and loyalty are evaluated by lower courts.

  • Lower courts display rigour, emphasizing public policy over private desire, even with nearly a decade of continuous usage.

  • The Cassation refuses to overturn such factual judgments, reinforcing the doctrine and future case guidance.