The Constitutional Court South Africa has made history this week by ruling that men can now legally take their wife’s surname, or use a hyphenated family name, after marriage. This powerful judgment changes a law that had been in place since 1992, which allowed only women to change their surname.
Why the Constitutional Court South Africa ruling matters
For over 30 years, the Births and Deaths Registration Act created an unfair system where women could adopt their husband’s surname, but men couldn’t do the same. The Constitutional Court South Africa ruled this as unconstitutional discrimination, violating gender equality rights.
A win for gender equality
The Constitutional Court South Africa said identity and naming choices belong to both spouses, not just one. Families can now choose names based on equality and personal identity, not outdated traditions.
What happens next
Parliament has two years to amend the law. If lawmakers don’t act, the unconstitutional rule will no longer apply. South Africans can expect increased pressure on government to make the legal changes sooner.
In a landmark ruling this week, South Africa’s Constitutional Court declared that a law preventing husbands from adopting their wives’ surnames (or using a hyphenated surname) is unconstitutional. The law in question comes from the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1992. Under that law, women could change their surname after marriage, but men couldn’t take their wife’s last name—or share in a hyphenated surname. This was over 30 years of unequal legal treatment.
Two couples challenged the law, saying it treated them unfairly because of their gender. They said they should have the same right as women to make choices about their surname after marriage. The court agreed. Justice Leona Theron said that stopping men from choosing their surname was discriminatory.
The ruling gives Parliament two years to amend the legislation so it does not discriminate. That means lawmakers must change the law to allow both spouses—husband or wife—to choose either name, or use a combined name, if they wish.
This is a big win for equality. Supporters say it corrects a legacy of outdated rules carried over from apartheid-era legislation and culture that assumed norms about what names men and women should have. Critics argue this may clash with cultural or traditional expectations. But despite cultural concerns, the judgment is part of a series of recent legal changes in South Africa aimed at promoting gender equality.
Aside from symbolism, this ruling has practical consequence. People who want to change their name can now do so based on love, personal identity, or fairness, not just because tradition or law forced one gender to follow rules that the other did not. It also signals that South Africa’s legal system continues to confront past inequalities—some formal, some informal—and that citizens can use court challenges to change discriminatory laws.
Lawmakers have until two years from now to fix the Births and Deaths Registration Act. If they don’t, the law will remain unconstitutional. President Cyril Ramaphosa, the Department of Home Affairs, and Parliament are likely to face pressure to act, because many people and advocacy groups will push for the changes sooner rather than later.
