•APPLICATION/REQUÊTE N° 11046/84 David John LANT v/the UNITED KINGDOM David John LANT c/ROYAUME-UNI DECISION of 10 December 1985 on the admissibility of the application DÉCISION du 10 décembre 1985 sur la recevabilité de la requête Article 8, paragraph 1 of the Convention : A refusal by prison authorities to use a prisoner's new name subsequent to a unilateral Deed of Change ofName recognised by English law does not concern the right to respect for private life. Article 8, paragraphe 1, de la Convention : Le refus de l'administration pénitentiaire d'utiliser le nouveau nom patronymique d'un détenu après changement de nom par acte unilatéral, selon une procédure du droit anglais, ne relève pas du droit au respect de la vie privée. THE FACTS (Extracts) (français : voir p. 238) The applicant is a British citizen, born in 1945 and at present detained at HM Prison Parkhurst, Isle of Wight . He is represented before the Commission by Messrs George E . Baker & Co ., Solicitors, Guildford . The applicant was convicted of murder by Reading Çrown Court on 6 October 1977 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. The applicant changed his original surname by deed poll on 13 October 1982 by a straightforward procedure of English law which involves merely the execution 236 of a document in standard form and its submissiori for stamping with dnty of 50 pence. (The stamping requirement has since been repealed) A solicitor need not be invoh 3ed., although one is frequently employed . The applicant's represematives state that such legal services are unlikely to costmore than £ 20 . Pursuant to Circular Instruction 21/1982, the Home Office refuses to use ttie applicanc's new natne for official purposes, although lie is permitted to corresponid in his new name . 'rhus, as regards official documents, the applicant's prison and eorrespondence files, together with most of their contents, and official photographs, are headed by the original surname . Some of the documents in the prison file, the Category A logbook and prison index card are headed by both names . A few of the documents in the ptison file and the applicant's letter/visits record are headed by the newname . The, applieant claims thar: the~document by which he has charged his name has legal consequences which are being ignored by the Home Office . He also argues that iis chan,ge of name was designed to aid in his rehabilitation since a great deal of aotoriety was attaçhed to his previous surname under which he was convict :d for nurder. 'CHE LAW (Extract) 1 . The applicam complains of the refiisàl of the prison authorities fully to recognise the legal effects of the Deed of Change of Name execut :d on 13 Octobe.r L982, and claims that this refiisal constitutes a breach bf his right to respect for his private hfe.as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Conveni:ion. The relevant part of Article 8 reads as follows : "1 . Everyone has the right to respect for his private . . . life.. " Insofar as the applicant complains of the refusal of the relevant authorities to aunend all the applicant's records in prison to show only his new name, the Conr tnission considers that this matter is one which relates not to the right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the Ccnvention, but is a question relzting to the public administration of prisons . Therefore this complaint falls outside the scope of Article 8 . It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratiorte materiar with the provisions of the Convention, v 3ithin the meaning of Article ".27 para. 2. 237