You are on page 1of 3

CHANGE of NAME • [G.R. No. 130277.

May 9, 2002]

MA. LOURDES BARRIENTOS ELEOSIDA, for and in behalf of her minor child, CHARLES CHRISTIAN ELEOSIDA vs. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF QUEZON CITY, and CARLOS VILLENA BORBON Facts: Ma. Lourdes Eleosida filed a petition before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City seeking to correct the following entries in the birth certificate of her son, Charles Christian: first, the surname "Borbon" should be changed to "Eleosida;" second, the date of the parents' wedding should be left blank; and third, the informant's name should be "Ma. Lourdes B. Eleosida," instead of "Ma. Lourdes E. Borbon." In support of her petition, petitioner alleged that she gave birth to her son out of wedlock on May 24, 1992; that she and the boy's father, Carlos Borbon, were never married; and that the child is therefore illegitimate and should follow the mother's surname. The petition impleaded the Local Registrar of Quezon City and Carlos Villena Borbon as respondents. Issue: Whether or not corrections of entries in the certificate of live birth pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Code, in relation to Rule 108 of the Rules of Court may be allowed even if the errors to be corrected are substantial and not merely clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature? Ruling: Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court provides the procedure for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry. The proceedings under said rule may either be summary or adversary in nature. If the correction sought to be made in the civil register is clerical, then the procedure to be adopted is summary. If the rectification affects the civil status, citizenship or nationality of a party, it is deemed substantial, and the procedure to be adopted is adversary. This is our ruling in Republic vs. Valencia where we held that even substantial errors in a civil registry may be corrected and the true facts established under Rule 108 provided the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriate adversary proceeding. An appropriate adversary suit or proceeding is one where the trial court has conducted proceedings where all relevant facts have been fully and properly developed, where opposing counsel have been given opportunity to demolish the opposite party's case, and where the evidence has been thoroughly weighed and considered. ****

3. Kilos Bayan vs Ermita G.R. No. 177721, July 3, 2007 • • Only natural-born Filipino citizens may be appointed as justice of the Supreme Court Decision of administrative body (Bureau of Immigration) declaring one a natural-born citizen is not binding upon the courts when there are circumstances that entail factual assertions that need to be threshed out in proper judicial proceedings

FACTS: This case arose when respondent Gregory S. Ong was appointed by Executive Secretary, in representation of the Office of the President, as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Petitioners contended that respondent Ong is a Chinese citizen, born on May 25, 1953 to Chinese parents. They further added that even if it were granted that eleven years after respondent Ong’s birth, his father was finally granted Filipino citizenship by naturalization, that, by itself, would not make respondent Ong a natural-born citizen. For his part, respondent Ong contended that he is a naturalborn citizen and presented a certification from the Bureau of Immigration and the DOJ declaring him to be such. ISSUE: • Whether or not respondent Ong is a natural-born Filipino citizen

RULING: xxx respondent Ong is a naturalized Filipino citizen. The alleged subsequent recognition of his naturalborn status by the Bureau of Immigration and the DOJ cannot amend the final decision of the trial court stating that respondent Ong and his mother were naturalized along with his father. The series of events and long string of alleged changes in the nationalities of respondent Ong's ancestors, by various births, marriages and deaths, all entail factual assertions that need to be threshed out in proper judicial proceedings so as to correct the existing records on his birth and citizenship. The chain of evidence would have to show that Dy Guiok Santos, respondent Ong's

R. and complied with all the procedural requirements. [G. JULIAN LIN WANG. he can be prevented by injunction from doing so. MOLO Facts: Petitioner Julian Lin Carulasan Wang. contrary to what still appears in the records of this Court. No. 176 of the Civil Code. as in legitimation. Until this is done. filed a petition dated 19 September 2002 for change of name and/or correction/cancellation of entry in the Civil Registry of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang. For this reason. Issue: Does the law allow one to drop the middle name from his registered name on the cause mentioned? Ruling: The touchstone for the grant of a change of name is that there be ‘proper and reasonable cause’ for which the change is sought. respondent Ong cannot accept an appointment to this Court as that would be a violation of the Constitution. To justify a request for change of name. 5.A. After hearing. 4. CAPOTE Facts: Respondent Trinidad R. Gallamaso to Giovanni Nadores. 2007 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. Giovanni availed of the proper remedy. Capote. March 30. a minor. a petition for change of name under Rule 103 of the Rules of Court. Republic contends that the CA erred in affirming the trial court’s decision which granted the petition for change of name despite the non-joinder of indispensable parties. 157043 February 2. Giovanni is entitled to change his name as he was never recognized by his father while his mother has always recognized him as her child. petitioner must show not only some proper or compelling reason therefore but also that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name. the trial court found (and the appellate court affirmed) that the evidence presented during the hearing of Giovanni’s petition sufficiently established that.mother. under Art. represented by his mother Anna Lisa Wang. A change of name will erase the impression that he was ever recognized by his father. (c) when the change will avoid confusion.R. No. dishonorable or extremely difficult to write or pronounce. CEBU CITY CIVIL REGISTRAR. and was unaware of alien . Among the grounds for change of name which have been held valid are: (a) when the name is ridiculous.Giovanni’s guardian ad litem filed a petition for change of name of her ward from Giovanni N. TRINIDAD R. duly represented by his mother ANNA LISA WANG vs. A. was a Filipino citizen. 159966. G. to be amended/corrected as JULIAN LIN WANG. Respondent Ong has the burden of proving in court his alleged ancestral tree as well as his citizenship under the time-line of three Constitutions. Petitioner theorizes that it would be for his best interest to drop his middle name as this would help him to adjust more easily to and integrate himself into Singaporean society. Petitioner sought to drop his middle name and have his registered name changed from Julian Lin Carulasan Wang to Julian Lin Wang. It is also to his best interest as it will facilitate his mother’s intended petition to have him join her in the United States. 2005] IN RE: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME AND/OR CORRECTION/CANCELLATION OF ENTRY IN CIVIL REGISTRY OF JULIAN LIN CARULASAN WANG also known as JULIAN LIN WANG. (d) when one has continuously used and been known since childhood by a Filipino name. duly represented by the Registrar OSCAR B. (b) when the change results as a legal consequence. Issue: Whether or not the change petition for change of name should be granted? Ruling: The law and facts obtaining here favor Giovanni’s petition. This Court will not stand in the way of the reunification of mother and son.

. (e) a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of former alienage.parentage. and (f) when the surname causes embarrassment and there is no showing that the desired change of name was for a fraudulent purpose or that the change of name would prejudice public interest. all in good faith and without prejudicing anybody.