Judgment of the Central Netherlands District Court dated June 4, 2021

The applicants have two children. They had the intention of naming their first child after the grandfather (paternal). They had this intention even before having children. When the applicants were pregnant, they were convinced they were going to have a son, or at least they had a strong desire to name a son after the grandfather. However, during the pregnancy, it was ultimately revealed that the applicant would give birth to a girl. While the applicants were very happy with the arrival of their daughter, their focus on naming her after the grandfather made it impossible for them to consider another name. The chosen name couldn’t be adapted into a female variant for the veneration. This led to difficulties in choosing a name for their daughter.

When the applicant gave birth to their second child, they had a son. Since their daughter was not named after the grandfather, the applicants had doubts about whether they wanted to venerate their son. Eventually, they decided to give their son two first names. The applicants quickly agreed that they did want to name their daughter after the grandfather (maternal).

The applicants intended to name their daughter earlier, but due to the later birth of their son and the associated costs, they were unable to proceed sooner. For the past few years, they have been discussing this change with their daughter, and she also wants it. Sometimes, their daughter writes both names when filling in her name somewhere. The applicants consider the name change important due to the family connection with the grandfather, as well as their desire not to differentiate in terms of veneration between their two children. They want both to have a namesake.

The court grants the request based on the applicants’ motivation.