"She's not the Messiah etc": How the judge summed it up.
A woman who brought a claim stating that her "rightful name" is Jesus Christ, has been warned by the court that she risks having a restraint order against her.
The claimant was registered at birth as Michelle Andrea Derrig, and subsequently changed her surname to Hargreaves when she got married. In 2017, she was apparently baptised and given the name of Chellemia Dreanha, but in 2021 she changed her name to Jesus Christ.
She brought a claim, under the name of "The Lord Jesus Christ", that she had been wrongly named, that she was reborn of water and spirit from the living god of Jesus Christ and sought relief, relating to the name on her birth certificate and registration of her birth. The defendants were named as the district probate court lessors, reversioners and/or tenants in possession.
Jesus H (for Hargreaves) Christ
The claimant says that she was "just a simple man, a child born in the image of God, wrongly named, numbered and formed on to a Birth Certificate in the image and likeness of the UK”, and requested the “Defendant Registrar General to correct/amend the name to the rightful name Jesus Christ on Birth Certificate”.
Judge Hodge QC said he had difficulty in discerning "what relief is sought, but it appears to be some change in the name in which the claimant was registered at the date of birth because she has since been baptised and then changed her name to ‘Jesus Christ’.”
The claimant tried to rely on a statute, the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, which relates to property held on trust. Judge Hodge said he was "totally unable to see the relevance of that statute to the present claim," and also dismissed other legislation referred to by the claimant as not being "particularly material."
The judge made an initial order to strike out the claim. But Hargreaves applied to set aside the strike out order, and addressed the court for 20 minutes during a telephone hearing.
The judge dismissed the application stating that there was nothing to suggest her birth had been wrong registered. He said the claim was "arrant nonsense" and that the application was "totally without merit."
The judge added: "I warn the claimant now that if she makes any further claims or applications of a similar nature, then the court may well find that it has the power to, and that it should, make a civil restraint order against her."