A child has been left without legal recognition despite DNA evidence identifying her biological father, after the Family Court rejected a man's request to be legally recognised as her father.

The ruling is now being challenged before the Court of Appeal, with the appellant arguing that the decision effectively revives an approach previously condemned by the European Court of Human Rights.

According to the appeal, the child was born while her mother was still legally married to another man. Although a DNA report identifying the appellant as the biological father was presented before the court and confirmed under oath by forensic expert Dr Christopher Farrugia, the Family Court dismissed the request.

The appeal states that neither the child's mother nor her estranged husband disputed the DNA evidence. Nevertheless, the court concluded that the genetic test alone was insufficient to establish paternity and required further proof before recognising the appellant as the child's legal father.

The appellant argues that the consequences of the judgment extend beyond the legal dispute, claiming the child remains unregistered and unrecognised by the Maltese State. According to the appeal, she is unable to access healthcare, social benefits and education, while her biological parents are also unable to benefit from assistance available to parents.

In challenging the ruling, the appellant points to a landmark judgment delivered by the European Court of Human Rights in 2006, in which the Strasbourg court unanimously found that Malta had violated a man's rights after the local courts refused to rely on DNA evidence in a paternity dispute.

The appellant argues that, despite that judgment and advances in scientific testing, the Family Court adopted the same approach by refusing to treat the DNA evidence as sufficient to establish paternity.

The appeal also argues that requiring proof beyond uncontested DNA evidence ignores scientific certainty and risks leaving children born in similar circumstances without legal recognition.

An urgent request has also been filed, asking the Court of Appeal to hear the case with expedition. The appellant is requesting that the Family Court's judgment be overturned and that he be declared the child's natural father.

The appellant was represented by lawyers David Camilleri and José A. Herrera

Justice Abigail Lofaro presided over the case.