name
choice, use, evidence, and accurate naming
a name is a designation used for a man -which man is it?
a name is also what a thing is - it is a man;
a man, by whatever name, can not identify with fiction; it is not possible;
a name for fiction can not point to something in reality; the name a man uses, can not point to an imaginary device, it does not exist; fiction is always fiction, to pretend otherwise is to lie;
the name points to the man
under name, n., sense 1a, man kind wrote of sounds used as the “individual designation” of a person, animal, place, or thing; sense 2a includes an “object of thought”; sense 9a places “the mere appellation” in contrast with “the actual person or thing”;
a name is a designation (pointer) used for the man; the designation is not the man, nor a separate thing; neither can fiction have a name John and answer from reality; the name does not bring the man into being, and a man does not cease to be if he changes his name; but the self can collapse with a shift in conciousness see self; there is a biblical reference here: I Corinthians 15:47 — The first man is of the earth, earthy: The second man is the Lord from heauen;
we might today consider that shift from natural man (body) to conciousness (spirit);
this has been documented for thousands of years, more can be found under non-duality, self enquiry, and enlightenment;
misdirection - the name
the use of a name can distract from the prior fact that a man can not interact with fiction; fiction is not in reality;
this is an obvious obstacle; man kind of the legal society invent an artificial person for man kind to use, and then present the artificial person as though interaction with it were possible; the artificial person is itself fiction, so the invention does not remove the obstacle or cross into reality;
of course, it is a lie; a man devises and pretends to use the artificial person, and a man does every deed attributed to it;
how to change a name
legally, for an adult man in England and Wales, the change described in the legal records can be grouped into three connected deeds:
- choose the new name and wish to be known by it;
- use that name as his name; and
- invite other man kind to call him by it, so that he becomes known by that name;
what man kind wrote in the legal records
in Klotho Brands Limited v Stanford [2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch), paragraph 54, HHJ Paul Matthews wrote that “your name is what others call you”; he wrote that a deed poll or statutory declaration supplies evidence, that no formal evidence is essential, and that enrolment adds publicity rather than legal effect;
in O'Driscoll v Clayton [2024] EWHC 1118 (Ch), paragraphs 27 and 29, HHJ Matthews wrote of choice, invitation and use, and that an unenrolled and an enrolled deed have the same legal quality;
in the Ministry of Justice written answer of 3 March 2021, Chris Philp, a man then serving as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, wrote that a given or family name may be changed by using the new name and becoming known by it, with no legal formalities; the legal explanatory note to the Enrolment of Deeds (Change of Name) Regulations 1994 separates evidence and enrolment from the change;
those legal records separate the change from proof of the change; a legal deed poll may preserve evidence, but the paper does not grant the name; there is no further general step in which a man must enrol a deed, or ask permission;
given name, surname, and title
| part | what it is |
|---|---|
Mr | courtesy title placed before the name |
John | forename or given name; |
Doe | surname or family name; an additional name |
courtesy, n.
b. Hence courtesy title: a title of no legal validity given by social custom or courtesy; esp. applied to the territorial titles given to the eldest sons of earls and peers of higher rank, the prefix Lord or Lady to the names of the younger sons and the daughters of dukes and marquises, and of Honourable to the children of Viscounts and Barons. So also courtesy rank, etc. Also transf.
forename means a first or given name; surname is formed from sur- and name, after the French surnom; man kind described surnom as an “additional name”, and in the current family-name sense distinguished the surname from the given name; mister and Mrs are recorded as prefixed titles of courtesy;
sur-name: a name added over and above; it is a kind of name, but it is not, by itself, the whole name;
“a name on top” is the plain-language explanation drawn here from sur-name; it is not the OED's exact wording; the example is limited to the familiar English convention, because not every naming tradition divides or orders a name in this way;
HM Land Registry legal form ID3 separates title, first or given names, and surname or family name; in legal passport guidance, man kind wrote that a title is recorded separately and will not form part of the name, subject to the stated exception; in legal GOV.UK deed-poll guidance, a deed poll cannot change Mr or Mrs;
in Mr John Doe, changing or omitting Mr does not change the manJohn; changing or omitting Doe does not change the manJohn; however to pretend that the name can change John into something other than a man is falsehood, and in plain terms a lie; a deed is required to move the pretense, and is likely fraud;
legal UK GDPR
in the legal product called the UK GDPR, man kind use the expression “personal data”; the word personal is retained only as part of that legal expression and belongs here to the legal person or character vocabulary of that product, not as another word for man;
in Article 5(1)(d) it is written that those data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; in Article 16 it is written that the man described by the legal character-name “data subject” has a right to obtain rectification of inaccurate data without undue delay;
in legal ICO guidance, man kind explain that accuracy depends upon what the record is intended to show; a former name may remain accurate where it is clearly recorded as historical;
once a man keeping a current legal record has been told of the changed name and given the evidence reasonably needed to verify it, the deed due is to consider the challenge and rectify the current-name data if they are inaccurate; he may preserve an accurate history, but he should not leave a current-name field misleading; altering the record does not create or grant the name; however, the omission of the type of name being that of a man, would be a serious mistake in a record comprising of fiction;
once another man has been told
the legal judgments record choice, use, and invitation; they do not decide that every man is compelled to speak or that silence is a wrong; in the OED, a name is an individual designation and misname is calling by a wrong name;
in Karpichkov v National Crime Agency [2023] EWHC 2653 (KB), footnote 8 to paragraph 59, Freedman J wrote that treating the man's lawfully changed current name as an alias was strictly incorrect and that his current name was his “real” name; he also wrote that the label made no difference to that case; the legal record supports accurate description;
once John Doe tells another man that his current name is John Doe, that other man knows the designation; if he then chooses to address or record John Doe by name, accuracy is due within that deed; silence is not false naming, and an accurate historical reference is not false naming; knowingly putting forward a different current name is the deed being tested as misnaming;
if accuracy were not due, i might call John Doe and every other man Richard Roe after being told otherwise; surrounding context might still point out a man, but repetition would not make Richard Roe the established name of every man;
for an inaccurate current legal record, correction may be due and its withholding may be the wrong; in speech or new writing, the wrong being tested is the positive deed of knowingly misnaming the man;
who does the naming deed?
in Genesis 1:5, 1:8 and 1:10 of the 1611 Authorized Version, God called the light Day, the darkness Night, the firmament Heaven, the dry land Earth and the gathering together of the waters Seas; in Genesis 1:26 and 1:28, dominion is written before Adam's naming deed;
in Genesis 2:19–20, it is written that out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air, brought them to Adam “to see what he would call them”, and Adam “gaue names” to the cattle, fowl and beasts; it is not written that Adam named anything God created;
in Genesis 5:2, it is written that God “called their name Adam”, referring collectively to male and female; in Genesis 17:5, God said to Abram, “Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall bee Abraham”;
the source separates the deeds: God calls names in Genesis 1 and 5; the LORD God forms and brings in Genesis 2; Adam calls and gives names to the living creatures brought to him; it is not written that dominion caused or authorised Adam's naming; a man without rightful dominion can still impose a label;
the name changes; the man remains
in paragraphs 52–53 of Klotho Brands, the judge recorded that a wrong or variant spelling does not by itself defeat service of a legal document objectively intended for the same man or woman; service upon the wrong man or woman is different;
at paragraph 55, the judge used the legal expressions “legal personality” and “the same person in law” when recording continuity: a change of name does not remove existing legal rights, liabilities, proceedings, or obligations;
separately, in VATREG02100 of HMRC's VAT Registration Manual, man kind distinguish “legal persons” from “natural persons”; a legal person is described as “an entity or body which has an existence separate and distinct from the persons … comprising that entity or body”;
the judgment's “same person in law” is treated here as the legal person or character in that record; VATREG02100 separately uses “legal person” for the entity or body described there; neither source says that the legal person is the man;
whatever name, title, office, or corporate designation is used, when a man uses his body to do a deed, that man does the deed; the man and the deed are not the invented designation; a corporate fiction does not exist;
the legal boundary
this page concerns an adult in England and Wales who has capacity to choose a name; particular duties or restrictions may be written in a legal statute, licence condition, or court order; different legal provisions apply to children;
in section 1 and section 2 of the legal product called the Fraud Act 2006, man kind wrote the elements of the offence described there; mere use of another name is not, without those elements, fraud; in reality, pretending that a legal person exists for gain or advantage is fraud;
further reasoning
open the reasoning about title, ownership, and the legal character
civil title, rank, and equality
in the Government Digital Service legal-government model titled Person Data Standard, man kind describe Mr, Mrs, Miss, Ms, and Mx as civil social titles which “do not indicate rank, role, or qualification”; that 2026 alpha model is draft and illustrative, not legislation;
in the 1933 OED, it is written that civil is “of or pertaining to citizens” and “pertaining to the organization and internal affairs of the body politic, or state”; in sense 17 it is written, “Legal as distinguished from natural”; the OED does not apply that sense to the government model's compound expression;
in the OED, under courtesy, n., sense 3b, it is written that a courtesy title is “a title of no legal validity given by social custom or courtesy”, especially in peerage usage; this is a dictionary record of the expression, not a legal judgment about every title or form of address;
a civil title is an invention within a written social classification; some other titles express office or rank, but the title does not become the man's name or alter the man; man kind remains equal as man kind; any inequality expressed only by devised rank belongs to the written fiction;
who owns the name?
in legal IPO decision O/166/07, a Court of Appeal statement is reproduced that, apart from statute, there is no property in a name as such; in the legal judgment Fenty v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 3, Kitchin LJ wrote that, registered trade marks aside, no one can claim monopoly rights in a word or name;
no owner is needed to explain a man's name; it designates the man; a man may have dominion over paper or another physical thing bearing the writing, but that is not dominion over the abstract designation;
the legal character is not the man
Blackstone wrote that man kind who write law use the legal categories “natural persons” and “artificial persons”; he wrote that a corporate name is “the very being of its constitution”, and that an aggregate corporation is “invisible, and existing only in intendment and consideration of law”;
the legal “person” is a character or mask written and carried by man kind; it has no body, breath, mind, will, speech, or deed of its own; the man's name is different from a corporate name because it is not the being of the man and may change through choice and use;
conclusion
the name is a designation, not the man; choice and use establish the name; evidence does not grant it; accuracy is due when another man chooses to name, in particular when he specifically declares it points to a man;
source links and records
- legal judgment record: Klotho Brands Limited v Stanford [2025] EWHC 1966 (Ch), paragraphs 52–56;
- legal judgment record: O'Driscoll v Clayton [2024] EWHC 1118 (Ch), paragraphs 22–29;
- legal judgment record: Karpichkov v National Crime Agency [2023] EWHC 2653 (KB), footnote 8 to paragraph 59;
- legal regulation: Enrolment of Deeds (Change of Name) Regulations 1994, explanatory note;
- legal government record: Ministry of Justice written answer UIN 157133, answered 3 March 2021;
- source record: Oxford English Dictionary, second edition: name, surname, forename, mister, Mrs, title, rank, civil, courtesy, misname, own, and related entries;
- legal government form: HM Land Registry form ID3, fields 1.1–1.3;
- legal government guidance: GOV.UK deed-poll guidance and passport title guidance;
- legal-government product: Government Digital Service Person Domain logical model, Person Data Standard (Alpha), published 30 June 2026;
- legal HMRC guidance: VAT Registration Manual, VATREG02100, “Basic principles of registration: meaning of person”;
- Bible source record: The Holy Bible, 1611 Authorized Version, Genesis 1:5, 1:8, 1:10, 1:26, 1:28, 2:19–20, 5:1–2 and 17:5;
- historical legal source record: William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book I, chapter I, page *123, and chapter XVIII, pages *467–477: 1765 first-edition text;
- legal UK GDPR and legal ICO guidance: UK GDPR Article 5(1)(d), Article 16, and ICO rectification guidance;
- legal decisions: Fenty v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 3 and IPO decision O/166/07;