Interim Decision #1499 

MAITEB OF OROYNOWEICI 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A.-14047448 • 

Decided by Board Ai guat 19, 1966 

Since the birth certificate of beneficiary (born out of wedlock in Poland in 

1948) showing his father to be petitioner (a native and citizen of the United 

States) reflects registration of such certificate in the Vital Statistics Bureau, which registration constitutes acknowledgment under Polish law, and 

since acknowledgment by the natural father of a child born out of wedlock 

in Poland constitutes legitimation, beneficial9%1s a "child" within the meaning of section 101(b) (1), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and 

eligible for nonquota status. 

The case comes forward on appeal from the order of the District 

Director, Chicago District, dated April 14, 1965, denying the visa 

petition for the reason that the•beneficiary is not a "Child" .as defined 

in section 101(b) (1) of the Aet, in that ha is not a. legitimate child. 

The petitioner, a native and citizen of the United States, 56 years 

old, male, seeks nonquota status on behalf of his child, -a native and 

citizen of Poland, 17 years old, male. The petitioner admits that he 

was not marriedto the mother of the beneficiary and that the beneficiary was 'born out of wedlock. • 

The District Director has concluded that the petitioner has failed 

to furnish proof of establishment of paternity as required' by the 

Family Law of Poland of 1946. The .file contains a report entitled 

"Rights and Privileges of a Child Born Out of Wedlock, in 1948, in 

Poland" furnished by the Library of Congress. 'It is believed that 

the District Director's conclusion as to the effect of Polish law under 

the circumstances of the case is misplaced. 

In support of the' visa petition the petitioner has subinitted a birth 

record issued by the Director of Vital Statistics and Bureau of Warsaw, Poland certifying that the beneficiary was born on June 5, 1948 

in Wasewo, Ostrow-M.92, Poland. from father, Stanislaw Chojnowsld 

(the petitioner) and mother HalinaChojnowski nee Witenski. 

The report from the Library of Congress indicates that the Law of 

287 
Interim Decision #1499 

1946, Concerning Family Law, provided three ways of establishing 

the paternity of a child born out of wedlock, one of which was 

acknowledgement by the father. Under Article 64, section 1, a father 

may acknowledge his child born out of wedlock; and under section 9, 

the acknowledgement shall be made in the form of an act before the 

official of the Civil Status Registry. According to the law concerning the Civil Status Register of ±946, the civil status of a person is 

established on the basis of the acts performed in the Civil Status 

Register (Art. 1). Entries made 'in the Civil Status Register constitute conclusive evidence as to the events established in the Register, provided the Register is properly kept (Art. 42, section 1). Entries in the Register constitute proof of the events established by 

them with respect to the birth, thus providing the answer to the 

questions as to where the child was born, when, his sex, his first and 

second name, the names of his father and mother. 

The report from the Library of Congress states that both. the Law 

of 1950 and the Law of 1964 state that all legal acts concerning the 

legal status of a child and the establishment of the paternity of a 

child, in particular,.should be determined according to the law existing at the time these acts were performed; hence, the provisions of the 

Family Code of 1946 in the matter of the establishment of paternity, 

were applicable. Article XXI, section 1 of the Law to Enforce the 

Code of Domestic Relations of 1950, provides that the validity of 

legal acts concerning the relationship between parents and children 

which were performed before the Code of Domestic Relations took 

effect shall be determined according to the provisions previously in 

force. Article XII of the Code of Domestic Relations and Guardianship of 1964, which superseded the Law of 1950, contains a similar 

provision. Under the Law of 1946 only a - child born out of wedlock 

who was acknowledged by the father enjoyed the full legal status of 

that of a child. born in wedlock (Art. 68). 

The report goes on to state that the Code of Domestic Relations of 

1950, and that of 1964, abolished all distinctions between children 

born of legally married parents and those born out of wedlock. Article XXVII provides that whenever the paternity of a. man who is not 

the husband of the mother has been determined, in any way provided 

for by the law in force, before the day on which the Code df Domestic 

Relations took effect (prior to October 1, 1950), the child shall have 

all rights and duties in. regard to his father and: his family in. accordance with the Code of Domeitic Relations on the day on which the 

Code of Domestic Relations went into force. The Law to Enforce the 

Code of Domestic 'Relations and Guardianship, which superseded the 

Law of 1950, contains a similar provision. 

288 
Interim Decision' # 1499 

The petitioner herein has submitted a birth certificate relating to 

the beneficiary which shows that the petitioner is the father of the 

beneficiary and such birth certificate was registered. in the Vital Statistics Bureau. This registration constitutes conclusive evidence of 

the events established in the Register and constitutes acknowledgement so as to render the child legitimate in accordance with the Law 

of 1946. Under the Polish lavi the child is legitimate. The matter of 

legitimation under Polish law is treated at length in Matter of K—, 

8 L & N. Dec. 73. The appeal will be sustained. 

ORDER: It is ordered that_ the appeal be sustained. and that 

the vim petition be approVed for nonqnota status on behalf of the 

beneficiary. 

289