South Africa’s Constitutional Court has delivered a landmark judgment allowing men to legally adopt their wives’ surnames, ending a decades-long gender imbalance in the law.
In its ruling, the apex court declared that Section 26(1)(a) to (c) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act was unconstitutional.
The court noted that the provisions discriminated against men based on gender, as they only permitted women to adopt their husbands’ surnames while denying men the same right.
The case was brought forward in March by two couples Jana Jordaan and Henry Van Der Merwe, alongside Jess Donnelly-Bornman and Andreas Nicolas Bornman.
Van Der Merwe had been denied permission to adopt his wife Jordaan’s surname, while Bornman was blocked from hyphenating his name to include Donnelly’s surname.
Although the applicants had initially secured a favorable judgment at the Free State Division of the High Court, South Africa’s Constitution requires the Constitutional Court to confirm any declaration of invalidity before it becomes effective.
With the confirmation granted, the ruling is now binding and enforceable across the country.
Legal experts have hailed the decision as a progressive step toward achieving gender equality in South Africa.
Advocates note that the law previously reinforced patriarchal traditions, granting men authority over marital identity while limiting women’s choices to adopt or retain surnames.
“This judgment affirms the principle that equality before the law must apply equally to men and women,” one rights lawyer commented after the ruling.
The case has also drawn widespread attention on social media, where many South Africans described the decision as overdue in a modern democratic society.
Some users pointed out that many cultures worldwide already recognize mutual surname adoption, and the ruling now aligns South Africa with global best practices.
The court’s ruling not only empowers men who wish to take their wives’ names but also strengthens couples’ ability to freely decide their shared identity without state interference.
This development is expected to influence broader debates on family law reforms in South Africa, as campaigners continue to push for the removal of outdated legal provisions that reinforce gender stereotypes.
