Swedish couple Michael and Karolina Tomaro welcomed a baby girl in late 2006 and christened her Metallica, in honor of the legendary American rock band.
When the family tried to register the name with Sweden’s National Tax Agency, however, the name was rejected because it was deemed “inappropriate.”
The Tax Agency apparently refused to register the name Metallica for two specific reasons: it’s the name of a rock group, and it includes the word “metal.” (The parents also mentioned that the official handling the case called the name “ugly.”)
The parents are now “locked in a court battle” with the Tax Agency.
What are your thoughts on “Metallica” as a baby name?
Update, 4/20/2007: A few weeks after this story became international news, the Tax Agency “said it was dropping its appeal, allowing young Metallica to keep her name.”
Sources: Baby named Metallica rocks Sweden, Baby Metallica allowed to keep her name
P.S. Did you know that Metallica co-founder Lars Ulrich — who is Danish, not Swedish, but Nordic nonetheless — has a father named Torben, and that Torben Ulrich influenced U.S. baby names back in the 1960s?
Although the source states this happened on “April 3, 2007”, this is old news, I’m afraid: the Swedish court eventually overturned the governmental refusion last month (March 21, 2007): it was all over the Dutch news that the parents were allowed to name their SEVEN month old daughter Metallica.
Besides: I really don’t see too much of a difference between Angelica and Metallica, although I don’t care for either :-)
Two Dutch children were officially named Metallica in the 90’s (when -admittedly- it seemed less old fashioned than in 2007).
Ah! Thank you for the correction, and the extra info.