Judgment of the Limburg District Court of June 9, 2021

Requester has had a son for a few months. At birth, she deliberately chose a specific name for him, but in the past year after his birth, she has been informed by others that the name may be considered ‘unusual.’ The reason for this is that requester is of Argentine descent, and she chose an Argentine name at birth, which is not common in the Netherlands.

As a result of this feedback, she has had doubts about the name, and she wishes to prevent the minor from being teased or bullied because of his first name at a young age. According to information from the Dutch first names database, this name occurs approximately 100 times in the Netherlands.

Because the name is relatively unusual, there is an expectation that it may lead to peculiar reactions or teasing/bullying. Following the feedback from others, requester has already opted for a different first name, which she now uses for her son. Requester has thought carefully about the name choice for the minor and has decided to use the second first name as his given name. It is expected that others will use the name as a shortened first name, and that shortened name is also a common name in the Netherlands.

Requester wishes for the second first name to be used as the baptismal name since she wants her son to be baptized. Choosing the name has been a difficult decision for requester because Argentine first names, in general, differ significantly from typical names in the Netherlands. However, given her own Argentine background, she wishes – and this aligns with the minor’s interests due to his lineage – for the minor to have an Argentine first name. The second first name, if used as the first name, is common in the Netherlands in terms of the given name, making it suitable for the minor in two respects.

The court grants the request, considering the motivation of the requester.