Jurisprudential Developments in Special Proceedings

 Settlement of estate
ARBOLARIO vs. CA G.R. No. 129163, (April 22, 2003)

Facts: Petitioners contend that the Court of Appeals overstepped its bounds when it ruled that since respondents did not raise the issue of partition on appeal, the RTC had no jurisdiction to divide the disputed lot. The CA held, however, that the partition of the property had not been contemplated by the parties, because respondents merely sought recovery of possession of the parcel held by the Salhays, while petitioners sought the annulment of the Deed of Partition respondents had entered into. Issue: Whether or not the questions as to the determination of the heirs of a decedent, the proof of filiation, and the determination of the estate of a decedent and claims thereto may be brought up before an ordinary court? Ruling: Petitioners in this case were unable to establish any right to partition, because they had failed to establish that they were legitimate half-brothers and half-sisters of the deceased Purificacion. Questions as to the determination of the heirs of a decedent, the proof of filiation, and the determination of the estate of a decedent and claims thereto should be brought up before the proper probate court or in special proceedings instituted for the purpose. Such issues cannot be adjudicated in an ordinary civil action for the recovery of ownership and possession. Note: The same ruling was made in Natcher v. CA, G.R. No. 133000, Oct. 2, 2001 where a regular court was resolving the question of the alleged advancement of property made by the decedent to one of his heirs. The SC ruled that the regular court had no jurisdiction over the issue. It belongs to the probate court.

SECOND DIVISION RIOFERIO vs. COURT OF APPEALS [G.R. No. 129008. January 13, 2004] Facts: Alfonso P. Orfinada, Jr. died without a will leaving several personal and real properties. Private respondents discovered that petitioner Teodora Rioferio (the paramour) and her children executed an Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate of a Deceased Person with Quitclaim, real estate mortgages and transfers involving the properties of the estate of the decedent. To recover their rights, Alfonso “Clyde” P. Orfinada III filed a Petition for Letters of Administration praying that letters of administration encompassing the estate of Alfonso P. Orfinada, Jr. be issued to him. Issue: Whether the heirs (respondents) may bring suit to recover property of the estate pending the appointment of an administrator is the issue in this case? Ruling: Pending the filing of administration proceedings, the heirs without doubt have legal personality to bring suit in behalf of the estate of the decedent in accordance with the provision of Article 777 of the New Civil Code “that (t)he rights to succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent.” The provision in turn is the foundation of the principle that the property, rights and obligations to the extent and value of the
Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 1 of 26

inheritance of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others by his will or by operation of law. Even if administration proceedings have already been commenced, the heirs may still bring the suit if an administrator has not yet been appointed. The heirs cannot be expected to wait for the appointment of an administrator; then wait further to see if the administrator appointed would care enough to file a suit to protect the rights and the interests of the deceased; and in the meantime do nothing while the rights and the properties of the decedent are violated or dissipated.

THIRD DIVISION [G.R. No. 141634. February 5, 2001] Heirs of Spouses SANDEJAS vs. LINA, respondent. Facts: Petitioners fault the CA Decision by arguing, inter alia, (a) jurisdiction over ordinary civil action seeking not merely to enforce a sale but to compel performance of a contract falls upon a civil court, not upon an intestate court; and (b) that Section 8 of Rule 89 allows the executor or administrator, and no one else, to file an application for approval of a sale of the property under administration. Issue: Whether or not the probate court has jurisdiction over the contract of sale of realty belonging to the estate of the decedent? Ruling: A contract of sale is not invalidated by the fact that it is subject to probate court’s approval. The transaction remains binding on the seller-heir, but not on the other heirs who have not given their consent to it. Probate jurisdiction covers all matters relating to the settlement of estates (Rules 74 & 86-91) and the probate of wills (Rules 75-77) of deceased persons, including the appointment and the removal of administrators and executors (Rules 78-85). It also extends to matters incidental and collateral to the exercise of a probate court’s recognized powers such as selling, mortgaging or otherwise encumbering realty belonging to the estate. Indeed, the rules on this point are intended to settle the estate in a speedy manner, so that the benefits that may flow from such settlement may be immediately enjoyed by the heirs and the beneficiaries.

SECOND DIVISION G.R. No. 154322 August 22, 2006 FIGURACION-GERILLA v s. VDA. DE FIGURACION et al. Facts: Respondents claim that: (1) the properties constituting Leandro’s estate cannot be partitioned before his estate is settled and (2) there should be an accounting before anything else, considering that they (respondents) had to spend for the maintenance of the deceased Leandro Figuracion and his wife in their final years, which support was supposed to come from the income of the properties. Among other things, respondents apparently wanted petitioner to share in the expenses incurred for the care of their parents during the ten years she stayed in the United States, before she could get her part of the estate while petitioner apparently wanted her gross share, without first contributing to the expenses. Issue: Whether or not there needs to be a prior settlement of Leandro’s intestate estate (that is, an accounting of the income of the prperties, the payment of expenses, liabilities and taxes, plus compliance with other legal requirements, etc.) before the properties can be partitioned or distributed? Ruling: While Section 8 of Rule 69 provides that there shall be an accounting of the real property’s income (rentals and profits) in the course of an action for partition, there is no provision for the accounting of expenses for which
Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 2 of 26

property belonging to the decedent’s estate may be answerable. on oath. and Sec. It is intended to elicit information or evidence relative to estate properties. PUNONGBAYAN vs. While petitioner points out that the estate is allegedly without any debt and she and respondents are Leandro Figuracion’s only legal heirs. Rule 87. 2004] SOTERO A. or other papers belonging to such estate as came to his possession in trust for such executor or administrator. or of disposing of the estate. R. unless the court otherwise directs because of extensions of time for presenting claims against. SECOND DIVISION [G. may cite a person entrusted by an executor or administrator with any part of the estate of the deceased to appear before it. of the same Rules. and he shall render such further accounts as the court may require until the estate is wholly settled. the heirs (petitioner and respondents) have to submit their father’s estate to settlement because the determination of these expenses cannot be done in an action for partition. inheritance taxes and similar expenses enumerated under Section 1. and if a person so cited refuses to appear to render such account. the estate. Rule 85. of the money. is merely in the nature of fact-finding inquiries. chattels. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 3 of 26 . goods. and of his proceedings thereon. provides : Every executor or administrator shall render an account of his administration within one (1) year from the time of receiving letters testamentary or of administration. 8. the intestate court denied the motion on the ground that it was premature considering that petitioner has been co-administrator for only one (1) day at the time it was filed. 7. she does not dispute the finding of the CA that “certain expenses” including those related to her father’s final illness and burial have not been properly settled. Rule 90 of the Rules of Court. 156842. under said Sec.6 of the same Rule. provides – The court. petitioner’s accountability as co-administrator was in no way settled as it did not preclude or forestall future accountings by him which. he is obliged to render within one (1) year from receiving letters of administration. Rule 85 of the Rules of Court. Rule 87. DANILO G. definitely settle the issue of his alleged illegal transfers and lease since a proceeding under this section. on complaint of an executor or administrator. like that under Sec. He maintains that petitioner should be made to account first for the alleged illegal transfers of estate properties made by him before he (respondent) could render his own accounting. accounts. PUNONGBAYAN Facts: The intestate court denied respondent’s motion that petitioner (who has been co-administrator for only one (1) day at the time it was filed) should render an accounting of his administration of the estate and to turn over the certificates of placement of the proceeds from the sales of estate properties. Issue: Whether or not the denial of the motion is proper? Ruling: Yes. Thus. Section 8. In a situation where there remains an issue as to the expenses chargeable to the estate. the court may punish him for contempt as having disobeyed a lawful order of the court. bonds. such as funeral expenses. 8. No. partition is inappropriate. Neither an accounting or an examination of petitioner under Section 7. or as required by the court until the estate is settled. December 10. or paying the debts of. Applying Sec. With the denial. and may require such person to render a full account.

JUDGE RAMON A. They prayed for the appointment of a regular administrator for the orderly settlement of decedent’s estate. They likewise prayed that. they stepped into his shoes and acquired his rights as devisee/legatee of the deceased Loreto San Juan. Federico. be designated as administrator of the estate of the deceased and that he be substituted for the deceased. Not having been judicially authorized. Aquino filed a pleading entitled “Appointment of Administrator” signed by Candelaria. Issue: Whether or not a person nominated as “administrator” by purported heirs of a devisee or legatee in a will under probate may validly substitute for that devisee or legatee in the probate proceedings despite the fact that such administrator is not the court-appointed administrator of the estate of the devisee or legatee? Ruling: The heirs of the estate of Oscar Casa do not need to first secure the appointment of an administrator of his estate. This is because repudiation amounts to an alienation of property which must pass the court’s scrutiny in order to protect the interest of the ward. Benhur. Nestor.R. Arlyn. a prior appointment of an administrator or executor of Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 4 of 26 . Issue: Whether the Release and Waiver of Claim precludes private respondents from claiming their successional rights.. intestate. No. CRUZ Facts: Loreto Samia San Juan executed a Last Will and Testament naming Oscar Casa as one of the devisees therein. Upon Loreto’s death a certain Atty. petitioner Michael C. JR. Petitioner contested the same. who died intestate. and that private respondents do not have the legal personality to institute the petition for letters of administration as they failed to prove their filiation during the lifetime of Sima Wei. in the meantime. FIRST DIVISION G. the legitimate son of the decedent. 2006 EPIFANIO SAN JUAN. Alejo that illegitimate children who were still minors at the time the Family Code took effect and whose putative parent died during their minority are given the right to seek recognition for a period of up to four years from attaining majority age. in Bernabe v. 163707 September 15. Jesus. the devisee Oscar Casa died. No. Teodorico A.R. While the petition for the probate of the will was pending. waived. Petitioner moved for the dismissal of the petition alleging that private respondents’ claim had been paid. and whether private respondents are barred by prescription from proving their filiation? Ruling: Parents and guardians may not therefore repudiate the inheritance of their wards without judicial approval. praying that one of them. Remedios and her minor children discharge the estate of Sima Wei from any and all liabilities. be appointed as Special Administrator of the estate.FIRST DIVISION G. vs. This vested right was not impaired or taken away by the passage of the Family Code. 167321 July 31. 2006 GUY vs. Eden. Anent the issue on private respondents’ filiation. Federico Casa.. all surnamed Casa. abandoned or otherwise extinguished by reason of Remedios’ Release and Waiver of Claim stating that in exchange for the financial and educational assistance received from petitioner. Thus. COURT OF APPEALS Facts: Private respondents alleged that they are the duly acknowledged illegitimate children of Sima Wei. Aquino filed a petition for the probate of the will. Edna. the Release and Waiver of Claim in the instant case is void and will not bar private respondents from asserting their rights as heirs of the deceased. Rafael and Ma. Guy. Jr. because from the very moment of his death.

Issue: Whether or not the deed of partition is valid? Ruling: As to the validity of the Deed of Partition of the subject property executed by the private respondents among themselves to the exclusion of petitioners. 140422 August 7. all surnamed Cristobal) are also the children of Buenaventura Cristobal resulting from his second marriage to Donata Enriquez. 2006 CRUZ et. without the participation of all persons involved in the proceedings.the estate of Oscar Casa is not necessary for his heirs to acquire legal capacity to be substituted as representatives of the estate. Under the said provision. Eufrosina and Jose. the applicable rule is Section 1. al. Florencio. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 5 of 26 . the heirs of the deceased Socorro Cristobal. In the case at bar. private respondents (Norberto. since the estate of the deceased Buenaventura Cristobal is composed solely of the subject property. vs. Anselmo Cristobal. which states: The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or administration shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the manner provided in the next succeeding section. CRISTOBAL Facts: Petitioners (Mercedes Cristobal. Rule 74 of the Rules of Court. No. On the other hand. Said heirs may designate one or some of them as their representative before the trial court. Private respondents executed a deed of partition without notifying petitioners. FIRST DIVISION G. and Elisa Cristobal-Sikat) claim that they are the legitimate children of Buenaventura Cristobal during his first marriage to Ignacia Cristobal. but no extrajudicial settlement shall be binding upon any person who has not participated therein or had no notice thereof. the extrajudicial settlement is not binding on said persons. the partition thereof by the private respondents already amounts to an extrajudicial settlement of Buenaventura Cristobal’s estate.R.

2001] BONIFACIA P. VANCIL. notwithstanding the fact that there are no statutory requirements upon this question. for the amount of eight million pesos? Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 6 of 26 . a cerebrovascular accident. the courts should not consent to the appointment of persons as administrators and guardians who are not personally subject to the jurisdiction of our courts here. and could not manage their conjugal partnership property may assume sole powers of administration of the conjugal property under Article 124 of the Family Code and dispose of a parcel of land with its improvements. wards of the estate. Notwithstanding that there is no statutory requirement. JARDELEZA. who suffered a stroke. Thus.S. merely on the basis of her U. 2000] JOSE UY and his Spouse GLENDA J. Jardeleza as the wife of Ernesto Jardeleza. November 29. who was then confined for intensive medical care and treatment at the Iloilo Doctor’s Hospital. worth more than twelve million pesos. For this. However. Facts: Court of Appeals disqualified petitioner Bonifacia P. BELMES. HELEN G. Guardianship and Custody of Minors THIRD DIVISION [G. this Court held: “xxx There is nothing in the law which requires the courts to appoint residents only as administrators or guardians. JARDELEZA. June 19. with the approval of the court in a summary proceedings. UY and GILDA L. the courts. she prayed for authorization from the court to sell said property. her own daughter and son-in-law. No. Vancil (grandmother) to be appointed as judicial guardian over the persons and estate of subject minors despite the fact that she has all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications as judicial guardian. Sr. 109557.R. petitioner. She signified to the court her desire to assume sole powers of administration of their conjugal properties. Facts: Petitioner Gilda L. respondents. Issue: Whether or not the grandmother of minor should be the latter’s guardian? Ruling: Being the natural mother of minor Vincent.” FIRST DIVISION [G. 132223. respondent. Jardeleza averred the physical and mental incapacity of her husband. Significantly. respondent has the corresponding natural and legal right to his custody. COURT OF APPEALS and TEODORO L. Even assuming that respondent is unfit as guardian of minor Vincent. to her co-petitioners. vs. still petitioner cannot qualify as a substitute guardian. accumulating to several hundred thousands of pesos already. petitioners. rendering him comatose. will find much difficulty in complying with this duty by appointing administrators and guardians who are not personally subject to their jurisdiction. citizenship which is clearly not a statutory requirement to become guardian. She also alleged that her husband’s medical treatment and hospitalization expenses were piling up. she urgently needed to sell one piece of real property and its improvements. without motor and mental faculties. In Guerrero vs.R. Issue: Whether or not petitioner Gilda L. charged with the responsibilities of protecting the estates of deceased persons.. etc. No. Teran. vs. this Court has held that courts should not appoint persons as guardians who are not within the jurisdiction of our courts for they will find it difficult to protect the wards.

M. for a minor is incompetent to execute such an instrument.. respondent. NATIVIDAD Facts: The complainants alleged that upon motion of the court-appointed guardian. a victim of stroke. herein respondent should have appointed a guardian ad litem for Licel. to protect her welfare and interest. MISAMIS ORIENTAL.At the very least. JR. PRESIDING JUDGE. FIRST DIVISION [A.M. Acenas.Ruling: The procedural rules on summary proceedings in relation to Article 124 of the Family Code are not applicable. vs. when she was presented before respondent’s sala to affirm the execution of her affidavit of desistance. 2004] CAPISTRANO OBEDENCIO. In such case. Licel Obedencio had come to court. complainant Capistrano Obedencio. Jr. 2000] Spouses LEONARDO DARACAN and MA. JUDGE JOAQUIN M. the proper remedy is a judicial guardianship proceedings under Rule 93 of the 1964 Revised Rules of Court. Provincial Prosecutor Emmanuel Hallazgo. respondent judge dismissed the criminal case. instead of hastily dismissing the rape case. Lina Francisco-Velez. the rules on summary judicial proceedings under the Family Code govern the proceedings under Article 124 of the Family Code. Facts: In a letter-complaint. Licel could not validly give consent to an affidavit of desistance. cerebrovascular accident. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 7 of 26 . MURILLO. complainant. In this case. Such rules do not apply to cases where the non-consenting spouse is incapacitated or incompetent to give consent. and with a diagnosis of brain stem infarct. charged respondent Judge Joaquin M. TERESA DARACAN vs. In regular manner. To his great surprise. respondent judge told him that the case had been dismissed three days earlier. There she was presented to affirm her affidavit of desistance. MEDINA. According to respondent judge. Rule 96 of the Revised Rules of Court. said affidavit should have been executed with the concurrence of her parents. September 27. Blg. definitely a minor. RTJ-03-1753. This being the case. Yet. Lina Francisco-Velez. the trial court found that the subject spouse "is an incompetent" who was in comatose or semi-comatose condition. Murillo of unjustly dismissing Criminal Case for rape. the respondent Judge issued the subject writ of preliminary attachment against their properties even as they are not parties to the guardianship proceedings. the respondent judge pleaded that he thought all along that under Section 6. JUDGE ELI G. Dexter Z. accompanied by her maternal grandparents and Asst. that even as the complainants had priorly been cited by the guardian in a motion to require them to appear for examination as debtors of her wards and against whom she (guardian) had initiated the filing of six (6) informations for violation of B. RTC. Truly. considering the nature and gravity of the offense charged.C. The situation contemplated is one where the spouse is absent. that the complainants were indebted to her wards. he could issue the questioned writ to protect and preserve the rights of the wards in the light of the sworn assertion of the guardian.P. or separated in fact or has abandoned the other or consent is withheld or cannot be obtained. he should have exercised more prudence and caution instead of perfunctorily dismissing the case. entitled “People v. February 5. BRANCH 26. without motor and mental faculties. No. No.. Issue: Whether or not the affidavit should have been executed with the concurrence of her parents? Ruling: Licel was only 14 years old. RTJ-99-1447. notwithstanding the absence of her parents’ conformity to the affidavit of desistance and lack of notice to them or their lawyer of the scheduled hearing. SECOND DIVISION [A. Explaining his side in the instant administrative case.” Complainant sought to secure from the court a copy of the warrant of arrest issued against the accused.

heir or otherwise.22. goods. Rule 96 of the 1964 Revised Rules of Court under which the respondent judge issued the questioned writ of preliminary injunction provides: Sec. may the court direct its delivery to the guardian. docketed as Sp. In such proceeding the court has no authority to determine the right of property or to order delivery thereof. Inarguably. Private respondent filed a petition for guardianship over Gardin Faith. Second. Proceeding when persons suspected of embezzling or concealing property of ward. they (complainants) did not appear to oppose the issuance of the writ of preliminary attachment. because the former had abandoned the same. 6. x x x the jurisdiction of the court in guardianship proceedings. ordinarily. No. touching such money. goods or interest or a written instrument. that the department store of the complainants that the sheriff opened.the foregoing rule was construed as follows: x x x its purpose is merely to elicit information or secure evidence from the person suspected of having embezzled. It is. it is the duty of the guardian to bring the proper action. as of then. 22 cases filed by the wards against the herein complainants can not be utilized by the respondent judge as basis for the issuance of the writ simply because the cases are not before the guardianship court over which he was then presiding. the B. In the leading case of Cui vs. the respondent judge “clearly exceeded [his] jurisdiction” in issuing the writ. Blg. DAGUIMOL Facts: A year after the birth of her illegitimate daughter Gardin Faith. Q-92-11053. since it appears that the proceedings for guardianship before the trial court have not been terminated. attained the age of seven.P. interest or instrument and make such orders as will secure the estate against such embezzlement.Upon complaint of the guardian or ward. belonging to the ward or his estate. Issue: Whether or not the father can exercise temporary custody of the minor. Piccio. or of any person having actual or prospective interest in the estate of the ward as creditor. February 7. Gardin Faith was left in the care of her father (private respondent herein) and paternal grandparents. as a matter of law. No. beyond cavil that. the law confers parental authority upon her as the mother of the illegitimate minor. concealed or conveyed away any personal property of the ward. Issue: Whether or not the writ should have been issued? Ruling: Section 6. 2002] DINAH B. If after the examination the court finds sufficient evidence showing ownership on the part of the ward. as the mother of Gardin Faith. the fact that herein complainants were deliberately and by stealth removing all their wares and goods from their store to the prejudice of the wards to whom they (complainants) were indebted to the tune of P5 million is entirely foreign to the guardianship proceedings. Petitioner contends that she is entitled to the custody of the minor. and no pronouncement has been made as to who should have final custody of the minor? Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 8 of 26 . Similarly. and the guardian’s remedy was to institute a collection suit against the complainants in the proper court and therein apply for a writ of attachment. concealment or conveyance. Proc. Gardin Faith. the court may cite the suspected person to appear for examination. SECOND DIVISION [G. concealed or conveyed away any money. where property clearly belongs to the ward or where his title thereto has already been judicially decided. therefore. as found by the Court of Appeals. 122906.R. Apart from that. Gardin Faith. Gardin Faith cannot be separated from her since she had not. First. is to cite persons suspected of having embezzled. and that only in extreme cases. TONOG vs. petitioner left for the United States of America where she found work as a registered nurse. that anyone is suspected of having embezzled. . COURT OF APPEALS and EDGAR V. concealed or conveyed property belonging to the ward for the purpose of obtaining information which may be used in an action later to be instituted by the guardian to protect the right of the ward. a guardianship court exercises but a limited jurisdiction that cannot extend to the determination of questions of ownership.

we find that the appellate court did not err in allowing her father (private respondent herein) to retain in the meantime parental custody over her. June 28.R. whom Joycelyn allegedly took away with her from the conjugal home and his school when she decided to abandon Crisanto. RICAFORT. for the present and until finally adjudged. One Renato Santos. violated Art. No.R. No.’ Ruling: It should be noted that the Family Code has reverted to the Civil Code provision mandating that a child below seven years should not be separated from the mother. The petitioner alleges that the minor Michael Kevin Pineda is his illegitimate son with respondent Loreta P. Presiding Judge. No. 213 of the Family Code. respondents. the mother’s immoral conduct may constitute a compelling reason to deprive her of custod y. Briones filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus against respondents Maricel Pineda Miguel and Francisca Pineda Miguel.Ruling: Yes. COURT OF APPEALS. FRANCISCA P. she saw Joycelyn slapping the child. Meanwhile. BRIONES vs. It has indeed been held that under certain circumstances. MIGUEL. THIRD DIVISION G. MIGUEL and LORETA P. HELEN B. MARICEL P. Issue: Whether or not the Respondent Court of Appeals. The findings of Renato Santos were corroborated by a house helper of the spouses who stated that the mother does not care for the child as she very often goes out of the house and on one occasion. The respondent Loreta P. Gualberto V filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Joycelyn D. Bearing in mind that the welfare of the said minor as the controlling factor. and thrust into a strange environment away from the people and places to which she had apparently formed an attachment. Hon. To deprive the wife of custody. minor Rafaello (the child. petitioner. Pablo Gualberto. 156254. with an ancillary prayer for custody pendente lite of their almost 4-year-old son. unless the court finds compelling reasons to order otherwise. Facts: Crisanto Rafaelito G. Not even the fact that a mother is a prostitute or has been unfaithful to her husband would render her unfit to have custody of her minor child. President of United Security Logistic testified that he was commissioned by Crisanto to conduct surveillance on Joycelyn and came up with the conclusion that she is having lesbian relations. Proc. But sexual preference or moral laxity alone does not prove parental neglect or incompetence. 156343 October 18. temporary custody of the subject minor should remain with her father. the husband must clearly establish that her moral lapses have had an adverse effect on the welfare of the child or have distracted the offending spouse from exercising proper parental care. 2004 JOEY D. It shall be only understood that. Q-92-11053. the child should not be wrenched from her familiar surroundings. and JOYCELYN D. Miguel. for brevity). MIGUEL Facts: Petitioner Joey D. Miguel is now married to a Japanese national and is presently residing in Japan. 2005] CRISANTO RAFAELITO G. PABLO-GUALBERTO. to obtain custody of his minor child Michael Kevin Pineda. Branch 260. THIRD DIVISION [G. vs. which mandates that ‘no child under seven years of age shall be separated from the mother. Issue: Who Should Have Custody of the Child? Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 9 of 26 . the private respondent herein pending final judgment of the trial court in Sp. GUALBERTO V. when it awarded the custody of the child to the father. Regional Trial Court Parañaque City.

Article 176 of the Family Code of the Philippines explicitly provides that "illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother.Ruling: Having been born outside a valid marriage. the putative father may adopt his own illegitimate child. and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. Of course." This is the rule regardless of whether the father admits paternity. Court of Appeals held that the recognition of an illegitimate child by the father could be a ground for ordering the latter to give support to. The law explicitly confers to the mother sole parental authority over an illegitimate child. the child shall be considered a legitimate child of the adoptive parent. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 10 of 26 . David v. but not custody of. it follows that only if she defaults can the father assume custody and authority over the minor. in such a case. the child. the minor is deemed an illegitimate child of petitioner and Respondent Loreta.

which is a public document. These certifications suffice as proof of the fact of petitioner’s adoption by the Delos Santos spouses until contradicted or overcome by sufficient evidence. It is not conclusive evidence of the truthfulness of the statements made there by the interested parties. The records. Adoption FIRST DIVISION G. As such.R. al. does not confer upon the child the status of an adopted child and the legal rights of such child. Following the logic of Benitez. 167405 February 16. and even amounts to simulation of the child’s birth or falsification of his or her birth certificate. Facts: This petition touches upon questions of filiation. SECOND DIVISION G. respondent Angelina and her co-defendants in SD-857 should have adduced evidence of her adoption. Issue: Is the adoption of Angelina valid? Ruling: The mere registration of a child in his or her birth certificate as the child of the supposed parents is not a valid adoption. Sotero Facts: Private respondents Chichioco and her alleged co-heirs filed before the Court of Appeals a petition for annulment of the adoption decree. 2006 Reyes vs. Issue: Whether or not the CA erred in holding that petitioner had to prove her adoption due to imputations of irregularities in view of Section 47 of Rule 39? Ruling: It should be borne in mind that an adoption decree is a public document required by law to be entered into the public records. A closer examination of the birth certificate reveals that respondent Angelina was listed as “adopted” both by the decedents. it is well-settled that a record of birth is merely a prima facie evidence of the facts contained therein. 141501 July 21. the official repository of which. It was alleged that petitioner’s natural mother supposedly connived with the court personnel to make it appear that petitioner was adopted by the Delos Santos spouses and that the CFI’s order for initial hearing was published in a weekly newspaper which was not authorized to publish court orders in special proceedings. the certifications issued by the local civil registrar and the clerk of court regarding details of petitioner’s adoption which are entered in the records kept under their official custody. Furthermore. Documents consisting of entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. is the local civil registrar’s office as well as the cour t which rendered the judgment.R. presumptions of co-equal acquisition. in view of the contents of her birth certificate. however. No. Mere “imputations of irregularities” will not cast a “cloud of doubt” on the adoption decree since the certifications and its contents are presumed valid until proof to the contrary is offered. are bereft of any such evidence. No. Villanueva and Gonzales. as well as all other judicial pronouncements affecting the status of individuals. are prima facie evidence of the facts contained therein. 2006 Rivera vs. Villanueva et. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 11 of 26 .

re-married there and now has two children by her second marriage and no longer communicated with her children . as claimed by petitioner. a citizen of the United States of America (USA). It must also be acknowledged that a person has no vested right in statutory privileges. 8552 was already in effect. 2003 Lahom vs. and to insure the opportunity to safeguard the best interests of the child in the manner of the proposed adoption. Section 9 thereof provides that if the written consent of the biological parents cannot be obtained. even before the passage of the statute. decreed on 05 May 1972. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Facts: Diwata Ramos Landingin. she should. still be revoked or rescinded by an adopter after the effectivity of R. 2006 LANDINGIN vs. First Division G. Issue: May the subject adoption. and even before his death he had made known his desire to revoke respondent’s adoption. If. that the biological mother of the minors had indeed abandoned them. It is a privilege that is governed by the state’s determination on what it may deem to be for the best interest and welfare of the child. The minors are the natural children of Manuel Ramos. however with his further request upon petitioner to give to charity whatever properties or interest may pertain to respondent in the future. thus have adduced the written consent of their legal guardian. The exercise of the right within a prescriptive period is a condition that could not fulfill the requirements of a vested right entitled to protection.A. USA. no longer could be pursued.” the privilege to adopt is itself not naturally innate or fundamental but rather a right merely created by statute. the written consent of the legal guardian of the minors will suffice. By then. despite the proddings and pleadings of the petitioner and her husband. Matters relating to adoption. but was prevented by petitioner’s supplication.FIRST DIVISION G. including the withdrawal of the right of an adopter to nullify the adoption Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 12 of 26 . respondent refused to change his surname from Sibulo to Lahom. Elma Dizon Ramos and Eugene Dizon Ramos who was born on. No. and Amelia Ramos. No.A. an action to set aside the adoption is subject to the five –year bar rule under Rule 100 of the Rules of Court and that the adopter would lose the right to revoke the adoption decree after the lapse of that period. the new law. having been initiated by petitioner after R. Lahom commenced a petition to rescind the decree of adoption in which she averred. Issue: Whether or not the petition for adoption is invalid for lack of consent of the biological mother? Ruling: No. No.R. that.R. of Filipino parentage and a resident of Guam. Consistently with its earlier pronouncements. 8552 that herein petitioner filed an action to revoke the decree of adoption granted in 1975. While adoption has often been referred to in the context of a “right. 164948 June 27. had already abrogated and repealed the right of an adopter under the Civil Code and the Family Code to rescind a decree of adoption. 8552? Ruling: It was months after the effectivity of R. When she filed her petition with the trial court.who went to Italy. the Court should now hold that the action for rescission of the adoption decree. filed a petition for the adoption of minors Elaine Dizon Ramos. 153989 July 14. Act No. 8552 had come into force.A. Interestingly. No. petitioner’s brother (deceased). Sibulo Facts: Mrs. Rep. No. to the frustrations of petitioner particularly her husband until the latter died. The general requirement of consent and notice to the natural parents is intended to protect the natural parental relationship from unwarranted interference by interlopers.

He alleged therein. filed a petition to adopt his minor illegitimate child Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia. the Family Law Committees agreed that “the initial or surname of the mother should immediately precede the surname of the father so that the second name. she remains to be an intestate heir of the latter. This custom has been recognized by the Civil Code and Family Code. among others. Issue:May an illegitimate child. a right of action given by statute may be taken away at anytime before it has been exercised.decree. it is necessary to preserve and maintain Stephanie’s filiation with her natural mother because under Article 189 of the Family Code.” his surname.” Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 13 of 26 . THIRD DIVISION [G. to prevent any confusion and needless hardship in the future. her relationship or proof of that relationship with her natural mother should be maintained.” her mother’s surname. it is customary for every Filipino to have a middle name. CATINDIG. and that he is now a widower and qualified to be her adopting parent. which is ordinarily the surname of the mother. and that her surname “Garcia” be changed to “Catindig. it allows. He prayed that Stephanie’s middle name Astorga be changed to “Garcia. 2005] IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF STEPHANIE NATHY ASTORGA GARCIA HONORATO B. use the surname of her natural mother as her middle name? This is the issue raised in the instant case. Last. herein petitioner. will be before the surname of the mother. Concomitantly. Catindig. In fact. there is no law expressly prohibiting Stephanie to use the surname of her natural mother as her middle name.R. petitioner. upon adoption by her natural father. Facts: Honorato B. No. the surname of her natural mother for the following reasons: First. 148311. 1994. Thus. Second. March 31. are subject to regulation by the State. as her middle name. that her mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia. Ruling: Stephanie should be permitted to use. What the law does not prohibit. that Stephanie has been using her mother’s middle name and surname. that Stephanie was born on June 26. if any.

in order that a subsequent bigamous marriage may exceptionally be considered valid. (b) the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead. She prayed that her son Sinfroniano C. vs. Facts: Petitioner Antonia Armas y Calisterio. Issue: Whether or not the trial court erred in holding that the marriage between oppositor-appellant and the deceased Teodorico Calisterio is bigamous for failure of the former to secure a decree of the presumptive death of her first spouse? Ruling: Under the 1988 Family Code. the sole surviving heir of Teodorico Calisterio. MADRONA. MARIETTA CALISTERIO. THIRD DIVISION [G.R. Petitioner cites Rule 109 of the Revised Rules of Court which enumerates the cases wherein multiple appeals are allowed and a record on appeal is required for an appeal to be perfected. 136467. she sought priority in the administration of the estate of the decedent. PRESIDING JUDGE FORTUNITO L. his whereabouts being unknown. No. Respondent Marietta opposed the petition. "In the Matter of Intestate Estate of the Deceased Teodorico Calisterio y Cacabelos. the following conditions must concur. 163604. Armas. of the Family Code. without bond. the marriage between the latter and respondent Marietta Espinosa Calisterio being allegedly bigamous and thereby null and void. respondent.. COURT OF APPEALS (Twentieth Division). Facts: The Republic (petitioner) insists that the declaration of presumptive death under Article 41 of the Family Code is not a special proceeding involving multiple or separate appeals where a record on appeal shall be filed and served in like manner. The petition for the declaration of presumptive death of an absent spouse not being included in the enumeration. Absentee (in relation to presumption of death) THIRD DIVISION [G. viz. unlike the old rule. be appointed administrator. Petitioner. Marietta stated that her first marriage with James Bounds had been dissolved due to the latter's absence. 2000] ANTONIA ARMAS Y CALISTERIO.: (a) The prior spouse of the contracting party must have been absent for four consecutive years. or two years where there is danger of death under the circumstances stated in Article 391 of the Civil Code at the time of disappearance. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 14 of 26 . for more than eleven years before she contracted her second marriage with Teodorico. No.R. RTC-BR. 35 and APOLINARIA MALINAO JOMOC. Issue: The principal issue in this case is whether a petition for declaration of the presumptive death of a person is in the nature of a special proceeding. Ruling: The instant petition is in the nature of a special proceeding and not an ordinary action. April 6. petitioner. HON. The petition merely seeks for a declaration by the trial court of the presumptive death of absentee spouse Clemente Jomoc. and (c) there is. a judicial declaration of presumptive death of the absentee for which purpose the spouse present can institute a summary proceeding in court to ask for that declaration." claiming to be inter alia. petitioner contends that a mere notice of appeal suffices. in relation to Article 40. it remained undisputed that respondent Marietta's first husband. petitioner. Antonia Armas. filed with the Regional Trial Court a petition entitled. In the case at bar. May 6. Contending to be the surviving spouse of Teodorico. THE HON. Neither does it involve a demand of right or a cause of action that can be enforced against any person. of the estate of the deceased and that the inheritance be adjudicated to her after all the obligations of the estate would have been settled. a surviving sister of Teodorico. respondents. The last condition is consistent and in consonance with the requirement of judicial intervention in subsequent marriages as so provided in Article 41. 2005] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. Jr. vs. It does not seek the enforcement or protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong.

Such judicial declaration also constitutes proof that the petitioner acted in good faith. he was of the well-grounded belief that his first wife was already dead. and all the documents submitted by respondent to the SSS in support of her claims are spurious. i. failed to discharge his burden. Bailon (Bailon) and Alice P. one who has been absent for seven years. and would negate criminal intent on his part when he married the private complainant and. 165545 March 24. petitioner maintains that the prosecution failed to prove the second element of the felony. Respondent filed a claim for funeral benefits. that the marriage has not been legally dissolved or. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES Facts: In a criminal action for bigamy. No. all of whom are still alive. Issue: Whether or not the Court of Appeals committed a reversible error of law when it ruled that petitioner’s first wife cannot be legally presumed dead as there was no judicial declaration of presumptive death? Ruling: It was the burden of the petitioner to prove his defense that when he married the private complainant in 1996. 2005 EDUARDO P. under the first paragraph of Article 390 of the Civil Code. DE BAILON Facts: Clemente G.R. Gaña had been “absent” for 21 years since 1975. SSS stopped the release of pension to respondent. as a consequence. under Article 390 of the Civil Code. Diaz (Alice) contracted marriage in Barcelona. THIRD DIVISION G. Cecilia Bailon-Yap (Cecilia). who was a member of the Social Security System and a retiree pensioner thereof. should thus be deemed valid notwithstanding the absence of a judicial declaration of presumptive death of James Bounds. TERESITA JARQUE VDA. This second marriage. died. she. shall be presumed dead for all purposes except for succession. whether or not he/she is still alive. 165842 November 29.James William Bounds. having been contracted during the regime of the Civil Code. while the second paragraph refers to the rule on legal presumption of death with respect to succession. had been absent or had disappeared for more than eleven years before she entered into a second marriage in 1958 with the deceased Teodorico Calisterio. the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead under the Civil Code. 2006 SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM vs. Bailon. SECOND DIVISION G. Bailon filed before the then Court of First Instance a petition to declare Alice presumptively dead which was granted. He points out that. who claimed to be a daughter of Bailon and one Elisa Jayona (Elisa) contested before the SSS the release to respondent of the death and funeral benefits. and the third with respondent. MANUEL vs. No. together with her siblings. she was presumed dead as a matter of law. however. in relation to Article 41 of the Family Code. He avers that when he married Gandalera in 1996. Issue: Whether or not the subsequent marriage of Bailon to respondent is bigamous? Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 15 of 26 . Sorsogon. as he had not heard from her for more than 20 years since 1975. paid for Bailon’s medical and funeral expenses. Close to 13 years after his wife Alice was declared presumptively dead Bailon contracted marriage with Teresita Jarque (respondent). The petitioner. the first with Alice. He should have adduced in evidence a decision of a competent court declaring the presumptive death of his first wife as required by Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code.e. he could not be held guilty of bigamy in such case.R. More than 15 years. the second with her mother Elisa. She claimed that Bailon contracted three marriages in his lifetime.. in case his/her spouse is absent.

Even if the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. or when she had been generally believed dead. and not in the annulment proceeding. 1996] RODOLFO G. the marriage cannot be impeached. even if the bigamous marriage had not been void ab initio but only voidable under Article 83. a mandatory requirement which has been precisely incorporated into the Family Code to discourage subsequent marriages where it is not proven that the previous marriage has been dissolved or a missing spouse is factually or presumptively dead. in which case the parties and their offspring will be left as if the marriage had been perfectly valid. the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the declaration of presumptive death of the absentee. Borga by stating that he merely relied on the Affidavit issued by the Municipal Trial Judge of Basey. Issue: Whether or not there was valid subsequent marriage? Ruling: For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage. Facts: The complainant in this administrative case is the Municipal Mayor of Dapa. In fact. Samar. complainant. the liquidation of any conjugal partnership that might have resulted from such voidable marriage must be carried out “in the testate or intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse. Surigao del Norte. a married man separated from his wife.” as expressly provided in Section 2 of the Revised Rule 73. such marriages can be assailed only during the lifetime of the parties and not after the death of either. In relation to the charges against him. No. without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse. Tagadan and his first wife have not seen each other for almost seven years. July 19.Ruling: It bears reiterating that a voidable marriage cannot be assailed collaterally except in a direct proceeding. still the action for annulment became extinguished as soon as one of the three persons involved had died. respondent. of the Code. as no step was taken to nullify. JUDGE HERNANDO C. respondent is rightfully the dependent spouse-beneficiary of Bailon. And furthermore. Navarro. paragraph 2. paragraph 1 of the Family Code which states that: "Marriage may be solemnized by: (1) Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court's jurisdiction”. requiring that the action for annulment should be brought during the lifetime of any one of the parties involved. and is made good ab initio. vs. because the second marriage had been contracted with the first wife having been an absentee for seven consecutive years. in accordance with pertinent provisions of law. With respect to the second charge. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 16 of 26 . NAVARRO. paragraph 2. he did not violate Article 7. respondent judge seeks exculpation from his act of having solemnized the marriage between Gaspar Tagadan. a summary proceeding for the declaration of presumptive death is necessary in order to contract a subsequent marriage. he maintains that in solemnizing the marriage between Sumaylo and del Rosario. SECOND DIVISION [A.M. of the Civil Code. Consequently. Bailon’s and respondent’s marriage prior to the former’s death in 1998. and Arlyn F. MTJ-96-1088. as provided in Article 87. confirming the fact that Mr. Rodolfo G. in accordance with law. DOMAGTOY. Upon the death of either. and that Article 8 thereof applies to the case in question. In the case at bar.

No. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 17 of 26 . a Presidential Commitment Order (PCO) was issued against him and eight (8) other persons. the respondent left the family home with her daughter. change his residence. MONCUPA vs. the petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus in the designated Family Court in Makati but was dismissed on the ground that the child was in Basilan. Villavicencio v. The provision of RA 8369 reveals no manifest intent to revoke the jurisdiction of the CA and SC to issue said writs. 8369 giving Family Courts exclusive original jurisdiction over such petitioners? Ruling: Yes. there is no need for actual confinement. Issue: Whether CA has jurisdiction to issue writ of habeas corpus involving custody of minors in light of the provision in R. RA 7902 (EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS) and BP 129 are absolutely incompatible since RA 8369 does not prohibit the CA and SC from issuing said writs. Issue: Should the person be actually confined for writ of Habeas Corpus to issue? Ruling: No. Any restraint which precludes freedom of action is sufficient. 2004) Facts: Sequiera Jennifer Delle Francisco Thornton was born to petitioner and respondent.R. be interviewed by media. He was temporarily released on the condition that he cannot travel outside Metro Manila. L-63345 [1986] PHSC 23 (30 January 1986)) Facts: Petitioner was arrested on the allegation that he was a National Democratic Front (NDF) staff member. closed. and with the Constabulary for a guard of soldiers. Thornton (GR No. the CA should take cognizance of the case since there is nothing in RA 8369 (RTC DESIGNATED AS FAMILY COURTS) that revoked its jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus involving custody of minors. 154598 August 16. The city authorities quietly perfected arrangements with the Bureau of Labor for sending the women to Davao. It cannot be said that the provisions of RA 8369. to exterminate vice. ordered the segregated district for women of ill repute. 1919) Facts: Mayor Lukban. as laborers.R. Petitioner filed another petition for habeas corpus with CA but it was also denied.A. Mindanao. Isuue: Whether or not habeas corpus can be availed of? Ruling: Habeas corpus is available not only for those who are in actual detention but even for those whose liberty is merely restrained. Lukban (G. The forcible taking of women of ill-repute from Manila to be brought to Davao. Family Courts have concurrent jurisdiction with CA and Sc in petition for habeas corpus involving custody of minors. which had been permitted for a number of years in the city of Manila. Habeas Corpus Thornton v. and have to report to the military. In view of this incident. L-14639 March 25. this petition for review. Without notifying her husband. Hence. with some government office for the use of the coastguard cutters Corregidor and Negros. No. for the best of all reasons. deprived them of their freedom of locomotion just as effectively as if they were imprisoned. ENRILE (G.

owners of the Sir John Clinic located at Caloocan City for allegedly detaining and imprisoning her daughter Arabella whom she left at the clinic for her failure to pay her hospital bill. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus is a remedy different from the special civil action of certiorari under rule 65 of the rules of court. Issue: Should the petition for the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus be granted to petitioner? Ruling: No.” Issue: Whether or not the proper remedy from the appellate court’s denial of a petitioner for a writ of habeas corpus is a petition for cetionari under rule 65 of the rules of court. Because the petitioner was charged with a non-bailable offense. the petitioner filed a motion seeking an earlier trial date. When thereafter. FEBRUARY 23. 111876. rule 41 of the ruled of court. 2001.R. et.Sombong v. The evidence adduced before the trial court does not warrant the conclusion that Arabella is the same person as Cristina. Cristina has not been shown to the petitioner’s daughter. Petition was dismissed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. The SC held that the petitioner should have appealed to this court from the CA decision denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Ruling: The Supreme Court denied the petition citing Administrative matter no. The petitioner then filed with Court of Appeals a “petition for Habeas Corpus and/or certiorari and prohibition. 2003. NO. CA. The well-settled rule is that certiorari. The trial court reasoned that there was no violation of the petitioner’s right to speedy trail. Since petitioner was not able to establish by evidence to be entitled to the custody of the minor Cristina on account of mistaken identity. information for kidnapping and detention of a minor was filed. 2005 Facts: On November 19. On July 4. However. 1996) Facts: Petitioner filed a petition in the RTC of Quezon City for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus against Dr. Ty disclosed the possibility that the child may be found in San Francisco del Monte in Quezon City. is not available where the aggrieved party’s remedy of appeal is plain. al. petitioner does not have the right of custody over the minor child Cristina because by evidence disclosed before the trial court. GLENN CABALLES Y CHUA VS CA G. it cannot be said that private respondents are unlawfully withholding from petitioner the rightful custody over Cristina. When she was just a baby. (GR NO. the petitioner prompted the resolution of his motion for reconsideration and filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that his right to speedy and trial has been violated. orders or judgment on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. 163108. as amended. 2003. Cristina was abandoned by her parents at the Sir John Clinic. On May 5. Facing arrest. Quite significantly the evidence disclosed that the child Cristina. Carmen TY and her husband. Petitioner Glenn Chua Caballes was charged with rape of minor in the RTC of Malabon City. It will be remembered that in habeas corpus proceedings. Arabella. the reason being that certiorari cannot co-exist with an appeal or any other adequate remedy. the spouses refused to return her child back. the question of identity is relevant and material. January 31. A criminal complaint ensued and later on. considering that the apparent delays could not be attributed to the petitioner also sought post moments of the trials. 01-03SC amending section 3. he was detained. the spouses refused to return her daughter. subject to the usual presumptions including those to the identity of the person. while certiorari is a direct attack of said processes. invoking his right to speedy trial Act of 1998. she paid the spouses but despite her pleas to have her child back. as judgment of the trial court. the alleged detention having been perpetrated in Caloocan. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 18 of 26 . the petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the order denying his petition for bail. speedy and adequate in the ordinary course. The agents of the NBI went in the said place and there found a female child who answered to the name of Cristina Grace Neri. orders. Dr. The writ of habeas corpus is a collateral attack on the processes. had been living with respondent Marietta Neri Alviar since 1988.

Section 1(3) of the 1935 Constitution. she claims that her father’s name in her birth record was written as “Yo Diu To (Co Tian)” when it should have been “Yu Dio To (Co Tian). respondent. and shall be filed with the nearest civil registry. The Court of Appeals did not allow respondent to use her father’s surname. 132980 March 1999 Facts: This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari seeking to set aside the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City in Special Proceedings No. CHULE Y. Likewise. it was erroneously indicated in her birth certificate that she was a legitimate child when she should have been described as illegitimate considering that her parents were never married. her nationality was entered as Chinese when it should have been Filipino considering that her father and mother never got married. considering that her Chinese father and Filipino mother were never married. Facts: In her petition for correction of entries under Rule 108. respondent automatically became a Filipino upon birth. Canon” in the child’s birth record. Change of name FIRST DIVISION [G. the Republic assails the Court of Appeals’ decision in allowing respondent to use her father’s surname despite its finding that she is illegitimate. the child elected Philippine citizenship. she is a Filipino since birth without having to elect Filipino citizenship when she reached the age of majority. Finally.” Third. 2004] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. Labrador GR No. January 13. What it did allow was the correction of her father’s misspelled surname which she has been using ever since she can remember. which provides that the citizenship of a legitimate child born of a Filipino mother and an alien father followed the citizenship of the father.” Petitioner contended that the summary proceedings under Rule Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 19 of 26 . which appeared as “Rosemarie B. she was not required to comply with said constitutional and statutory requirements to become a Filipino citizen. She claims that her being a registered voter attests to the fact that she is a Filipino citizen. the Republic invokes the provision in Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. Only her deceased father was Chinese.” Plainly. In its second assignment of error. By being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother. Second. The Republic’s submission is misleading. 625. The said party shall accompany the aforesaid statement with the oath of allegiance to the Constitution and the Government of the Philippines. 153883. As such. the above constitutional and statutory requirements of electing Filipino citizenship apply only to legitimate children. be changed to “Maria Rosario Canon. while her mother is Filipina.R. she claims that her surname “Yu” was misspelled as “Yo”. LIM. Stated differently. RP vs. upon reaching the age of majority. She presented a clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to further show the consistency in her use of the surname “Yu”. respondent claimed that : First. unless. In this regard. 686 1-CEB granting the petition filed by respondent to have the name appearing on the birth certificate of Sarah Zita Cañon Erasmo changed from” Sarah Zita Erasmo” to “Sarah Zita Canon” and that the name of Sarah Zita’s mother. petitioner. that legitimate children born of Filipino mothers may elect Philippine citizenship by expressing such intention “in a statement to be signed and sworn to by the party concerned before any officer authorized to administer oaths. These do not apply in the case of respondent who was concededly an illegitimate child. No. respondent does not need a court pronouncement for her to use her father’s surname. Issue: Whether or not the CA erred in ordering the correction of the citizenship of respondent and allowing respondent to continue using her father’s legitimate surname despite her illegitimacy? Ruling: Article IV. vs. She has been using “Yu” in all her school records and in her marriage certificate.

If the correction sought to be made in the civil register is clerical. If the rectification affects the civil status. Consequently. The changes sought by respondent were substantial. the date of the parents' wedding should be left blank. This is our ruling in Republic vs. and third. thus. Lourdes E. Sarah Zita and her purported parents should have been parties to the proceeding. for and in behalf of her minor child. No. in which all interested parties are impleaded and due process is observed. such as those involving the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the child. Eleosida. Carlos Borbon. were never married. and that the child is therefore illegitimate and should follow the mother's surname. it would affect her legitimacy as well as her successional and other rights.” as in Sarah Zita’s case. typographical and other innocuous errors in the Civil Registry. 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. Issue: Whether or not corrections of entries in the certificate of live birth pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Code. LOURDES BARRIENTOS ELEOSIDA. spelling. 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. 2002] MA. Borbon. May 9. and CARLOS VILLENA BORBON Facts: Ma. and the procedure to be adopted is adversary. The Supreme Court found the proceeding conducted in the present case does not suffice. It argued that Rule 108 cannot be used to modify.R." In support of her petition. an adversarial proceeding is essential in order to fully thresh out the allegations in respondent’s petition." second. it is deemed substantial. CHARLES CHRISTIAN ELEOSIDA vs. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF QUEZON CITY. Where the effect of a correction of an entry in a civil registry will change the status of a person from “legitimate” to “illegitimate. FIRST DIVISION [G. The change sought will result not only in substantial correction in the child’s record of birth but also in the child’s rights which cannot be effected in a summary action. that she and the boy's father. then the procedure to be adopted is summary. citizenship or nationality of a party. 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. 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. Issue: Whether or not summary proceedings for the change of name can be availed of? Ruling: Summary proceedings provided under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court and Article 412 of the Civil Code maybe used only to correct clerical. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 20 of 26 . the same cannot be granted in summary proceedings. 1992. 130277. which respondent desired to do. the informant's name should be "Ma. alter or increase substantive rights. The proceedings under said rule may either be summary or adversary in nature." instead of "Ma. Substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed only in adversarial proceedings. it annulled and set aside the decision of the trial court. and where the evidence has been thoroughly weighed and considered. where opposing counsel have been given opportunity to demolish the opposite party's case.108 of the Rules of Court and Article 412 of the Civil Code may be used only to correct or change clerical or innocuous errors. the surname "Borbon" should be changed to "Eleosida. After all. The petition impleaded the Local Registrar of Quezon City and Carlos Villena Borbon as respondents. Lourdes B. petitioner alleged that she gave birth to her son out of wedlock on May 24. Charles Christian: first.

duly represented by the Registrar OSCAR B. Capote. under Art. A. (d) when one has continuously used and been known since childhood by a Filipino name.A. No. dishonorable or extremely difficult to write or pronounce. a minor. 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. 176 of the Civil Code. 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. 157043 February 2.SECOND DIVISION [G. 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. a petition for change of name under Rule 103 of the Rules of Court. To justify a request for change of name.R. 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. (c) when the change will avoid confusion. Giovanni availed of the proper remedy. Among the grounds for change of name which have been held valid are: (a) when the name is ridiculous. Gallamaso to Giovanni Nadores. and complied with all the procedural requirements. as in legitimation. This Court will not stand in the way of the reunification of mother and son. FIRST DIVISION G. 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. the trial court found (and the appellate court affirmed) that the evidence presented during the hearing of Giovanni’s petition sufficiently established that. 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. March 30. (e) a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of former alienage. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 21 of 26 . After hearing. 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. CEBU CITY CIVIL REGISTRAR. JULIAN LIN WANG. 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. 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. 2007 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. No. (b) when the change results as a legal consequence. 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. CAPOTE Facts: Respondent Trinidad R. represented by his mother Anna Lisa Wang. duly represented by his mother ANNA LISA WANG vs. Petitioner sought to drop his middle name and have his registered name changed from Julian Lin Carulasan Wang to Julian Lin Wang. and was unaware of alien parentage.R.Giovanni’s guardian ad litem filed a petition for change of name of her ward from Giovanni N. A change of name will erase the impression that he was ever recognized by his father. 159966. all in good faith and without prejudicing anybody. to be amended/corrected as JULIAN LIN WANG. MOLO Facts: Petitioner Julian Lin Carulasan Wang. TRINIDAD R.

Joven Lee Benemerito. Issue: Whether or not in the petition for the correction of entry. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (BR. The proceeding there contemplated may generally be used only to correct clerical. would. Benemerito. Her interest was affected by the petition for correction. Benemerito appearing therein from 01 September 1989 to 25 January 1998. and Petronio L. it would be essential to establish that Peter Laurente Benemerito. NCJR. Benemerito. Benemerito. Edna V. GUIMBA. or a harmless change such as a correction of name that is clearly misspelled or of a misstatement of the occupation of the parent. Barco is among the parties referred to in Section 3 of Rule 108. Correction of entries THIRD DIVISION [G. BENEMERITO Facts: Respondent Petronio L. therefore not innocous. 1989 to reflect the actual date of marriage as January 25. in which all interested parties are impleaded and due process is properly observed.R. vs. typographical and other innocuous errors in the civil registry. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF MAKATI. Joven Lee. in effect.R. January 20. Issue: Whether or not the correction of the spelling of petitioner's name from Peter Laurente Benemerito to Petronio Laurente Benemerito and the change of the date of marriage from September 1. born on 01 June 1990 at a time when he and his wife were not as yet legally married. The intended correction of the date of marriage of the parents of Joven Lee from 01 September 1989. No. March 15. in relation to Article 412 of the Civil Code. an error made by a clerk or a transcriber. a mistake in copying or writing. appearing in his certificate of birth. No. spelling. and (b) the date of marriage of Joven Lee’s parents. herein respondent. the person named as being the father of Joven Lee. In order to effect the desired changes. Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. The entries sought to be corrected included (a) a change of the father's name from Peter Laurente Benemerito to Petronio L. are innocuous? Ruling: No. as the Natural Guardian and Guardian Ad Litem of MARY JOY ANN GUSTILO vs. and NADINA G. change the status of the child. MARAVILLA Facts: The Court of Appeals held that jurisdiction over the parties was properly acquired through the notice by publication effected in conformity with Section 4 of Rule 108. Nueva Ecija. filed a verified petition before the Regional Trial Court of Nueva Ecija asking for the correction of certain entries in the record of birth of his son. SECOND DIVISION [G. Benemerito and a certain Peter Laurente Benemerito. 1998. 146963. Barco assails this holding and claims that the failure to implead her as a party to the petition for correction deprived the RTC of jurisdiction. from being the legitimate son of Peter Laurente Benemerito to being instead the legitimated child of Petronio L. NUEVA ECIJA. COURT OF APPEALS (SPECIAL SIXTEENTH DIVISION). A clerical error is one which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding. 2004] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR. substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed only in adversarial proceedings. to 25 January 1998. On the other hand. 2004] MILAGROS M. as any judicial determination that June was the daughter of Armando would affect her Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 22 of 26 . on file with the Local Civil Registrar of Guimba. refer to the same person. jurisdiction over the parties was properly acquired? Ruling: Yes. The “corrections” sought to be made by respondent in the birth certificate of Joven Lee could hardly qualify as just clerical errors. states the procedure by which an entry in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected. BARCO. Sicat and Petronio L. 120587. PETRONIO L. 133-MAKATI).

doubt may always be cast as to whether a petitioner under Rule 108 would know of all the parties whose interests may be affected by the granting of a petition. and (3) the alleged marriage of private respondent to the child’s mother. No. alter or increase substantive rights. FIRST DIVISION [G. March 25. (2) the reference to private respondent as the father of Rosendo Alba Herrera. July 29. the court shall. Rule 108. minor. Jr. 164041. and cause reasonable notice thereof to be given to the persons named in the petition. 1982 in Mandaluyong Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 23 of 26 . COURT OF APPEALS and ROSENDO C. in which all interested parties are impleaded and due process is observed. LABRADOR Facts: Petitioner contended that the summary proceedings under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court and Article 412 of the Civil Code may be used only to correct or change clerical or innocuous errors. such as those involving the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the child. but were inadvertently left out. Substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed only in adversarial proceedings. Summary proceedings provided under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court and Article 412 of the Civil Code maybe used only to correct clerical.”. Alba.. 1999] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.Yet. which requires notice by publication. Armi A. The court shall also cause the order to be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province. 132980. Rule 108. Herrera filed a petition for cancellation of the following entries in the birth certificate of “Rosendo Alba Herrera. it would affect her legitimacy as well as her successional and other rights. The purpose precisely of Section 4. Armi A. Alba (Armi) on August 4. It argued that Rule 108 cannot be used to modify. Consequently. to wit: (1) the surname “Herrera” as appended to the name of said child.R. HERRERA Facts: Private respondent Rosendo C. The change sought will result not only in substantial correction in the child’s record of birth but also in the child’s rights which cannot be effected in a summary action.ward’s share in the estate of her father. Upon the filing of the petition. represented by his mother and natural guardian. The Supreme Court found the proceeding conducted in the present case does not suffice. which respondent desired to do. It cannot be established whether Nadina knew of Mary Joy’s existence at the time she filed the petition for correction. thus. the same cannot be granted in summary proceedings.” as in Sarah Zita’s case. an adversarial proceeding is essential in order to fully thresh out the allegations in respondent’s petition. Indeed. 2005] ROSENDO ALBA. Sarah Zita and her purported parents should have been parties to the proceeding. even though Barco was not impleaded in the petition. it annulled and set aside the decision of the trial court. ALBA vs. Rule 108 is to bind the whole world to the subsequent judgment on the petition. The changes sought by respondent were substantial. the Court of Appeals correctly pointed out that the defect was cured by compliance with Section 4.R. thus: Section 4. GLADYS C. by order. fix the time and place for the hearing of the same. Jr. Where the effect of a correction of an entry in a civil registry will change the status of a person from “legitimate” to “illegitimate. spelling. The sweep of the decision would cover even parties who should have been impleaded under Section 3. No. typographical and other innocuous errors in the Civil Registry. THIRD DIVISION [G. Issue: Whether or not Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court is the proper action to impugn the legitimacy of a child? Ruling: No. The fact that Nadina amended her petition to implead Francisco and Gustilo indicates earnest effort on her part to comply with Section 3 as quoted above. and ARMI A. After all.

sufficiently complied with the requirement of due process. where such entries sought to be corrected or changed are substantial: i. Issue: Whether or not the petition is appropriate? Ruling: The petitioners’ recourse to Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. Rule 108. is appropriate. The entries envisaged in Article 412 of the New Civil Code are those provided in Articles 407 and 408 of the New Civil Code which reads: Art. (10) naturalization. (2) Marriages. the publication of the order is a notice to all indispensable parties. events or factual errors envisaged in Article 407 of the New Civil Code include even those that occur after the birth of the petitioner. (15) voluntary emancipation of a minor. in such cases. The law does not provide for a specific procedure of law to be followed.R. acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of petitioner is therefore not required in the present case. (11) loss. (8) adoptions. But the Court approved Rule 108 of the Rules of Court to provide for a procedure to implement the law. (9) acknowledgments of natural children.e. (3) deaths. 473. the Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 24 of 26 . with the proper Regional Trial Court. THE CIVIL REGISTER OF MANILA and any person having or claiming an interest under the entry whose cancellation or correction is sought Facts: Petitioners filed with the Regional Trial Court of Manila a petition under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court for correction of entries in their certificates of birth. 138496. Manila and the publication thereof in a newspaper of general circulation in Manila. However. which binds the whole world to the judgment that may be rendered in the petition. No. The proceedings in Rule 108 of the Rules of Court are summary if the entries in the civil register sought to be corrected are clerical or innocuous in nature. the status and nationality of the petitioners or the citizenship of their parents. 2004] HUBERT TAN CO and ARLENE TAN CO vs. (13) civil interdiction. 1055 and had taken his oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and at the time of birth of [the] petitioners. However. 418 Arquiza St. their father CO BOON PENG was still a Chinese citizen that is why entry in their respective birth certificates as to their f ather’s citizenship was Chinese. events and judicial decrees concerning the civil status of persons shall be recorded in the civil register. as amended by Commonwealth Act No. Ermita. (14) judicial determination of filiation. He claimed that the challenged entries are false and that it was only sometime in September 1996 that he learned of the existence of said birth certificate. Being a proceeding in rem. they became Filipino citizens through the derivative mode of naturalization under ourNaturalization Law.The service of the order at No. Under Article 412 of the New Civil Code. 407. The decision of the court granting the petition shall be annotated in the certificates of birth and shall form part of the civil register in the Office of the Local Civil Registrar. The acts. The absence of personal service of the order to Armi was therefore cured by the trial court’s compliance with Section 4. February 23. and (16) changes of name.. 408. They alleged that they were born in the Philippines and the legitimate children of CO BOON PENG who is formerly a citizen of China. (6) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning. (7) legitimations. or (12) recovery of citizenship.. as amended. (5) annulments of marriage. (4) legal separations. An in rem proceeding is validated essentially through publication. the entries in the certificates of birth will not be corrected or changed. 535. Art. EN BANC [G. Acts. specifically Section 15 of Commonwealth Act No. It is enough that the trial court is vested with jurisdiction over the subject matter. Further they claimed that since they were born in the Philippines and still minors at that time. Moreover. Issue: Whether or not the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the person of petitioner and her minor child? Ruling: Substantial corrections or cancellations of entries in civil registry records affecting the status or legitimacy of a person may be effected through the institution of a petition under Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court. The following shall be entered in the civil register: (1) Births.City. Specific matters covered by the said provision include not only status but also nationality. which re quires notice by publication. no entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected without a judicial order. was conferred Philippine citizenship by naturalization under Presidential Decree No. including Armi and petitioner minor.

and. Valencia. she claims that her surname “Yu” was misspelled as “Yo”. Stated differently. In its second assignment of error. Issue: Whether or not the CA erred in ordering the correction of the citizenship of respondent and allowing respondent to continue using her father’s legitimate surname despite her illegitimacy? Ruling: Article IV.” Plainly. respondent automatically became a Filipino upon birth. Section 1(3) of the 1935 Constitution. 2004] REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 25 of 26 . the child elected Philippine citizenship. The said party shall accompany the aforesaid statement with the oath of allegiance to the Constitution and the Government of the Philippines. No. respondent does not need a court pronouncement for her to use her father’s surname.proceedings are adversarial in nature as defined by this Court in Republic v. Finally. In this regard. Second. As such. The Court of Appeals did not allow respondent to use her father’s surname. the above constitutional and statutory requirements of electing Filipino citizenship apply only to legitimate children. respondent claimed that : First. In such a proceeding.” Third. FIRST DIVISION [G. The Republic’s submission is misleading. while her mother is Filipina. and afforded the latter an opportunity to contest it. Likewise. that legitimate children born of Filipino mothers may elect Philippine citizenship by expressing such intention “in a statement to be signed and sworn to by the party concerned before any officer authorized to administer oaths. she is a Filipino since birth without having to elect Filipino citizenship when she reached the age of majority. (b) all persons who have claims any interest which would be affected thereby. considering that her Chinese father and Filipino mother were never married. she was not required to comply with said constitutional and statutory requirements to become a Filipino citizen.R. She presented a clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to further show the consistency in her use of the surname “Yu”. LIM Facts: In her petition for correction of entries under Rule 108. She claims that her being a registered voter attests to the fact that she is a Filipino citizen. upon reaching the age of majority. CHULE Y. it was erroneously indicated in her birth certificate that she was a legitimate child when she should have been described as illegitimate considering that her parents were never married. which provides that the citizenship of a legitimate child born of a Filipino mother and an alien father followed the citizenship of the father. her nationality was entered as Chinese when it should have been Filipino considering that her father and mother never got married. thus: One having opposing parties. 625. Only her deceased father was Chinese. contested. What it did allow was the correction of her father’s misspelled surname which she has been using ever since she can remember. Excludes an adoption proceeding. unless. the Republic invokes the provision in Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 153883. one of which the party seeking relief has given legal warning to the other party. the parties to be impleaded as respective defendants are (a) the local civil registrar. January 13. the Republic assails the Court of Appeals’ decision in allowing respondent to use her father’s surname despite its finding that she is illegitimate. and shall be filed with the nearest civil registry. she claims that her father’s name in her birth record was written as “Yo Diu To (Co Tian)” when it should have been “Yu Dio To (Co Tian). as distinguished from an ex parte application. These do not apply in the case of respondent who was concededly an illegitimate child. By being an illegitimate child of a Filipino mother. She has been using “Yu” in all her school records and in her marriage certificate.

L-10869. LEONOR.” Issue: Is a judgment voiding a marriage and rendered by the regional trial court under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court valid and proper? May its validity be challenged by the wife in a petition for certiorari against the husband who abandoned her and who is now living abroad with a foreign woman? Ruling: The only errors that can be cancelled or corrected under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court are typographical or clerical errors. 28. a mistake in copying or writing (Black vs. “Procedural Errors x x x in not finding x x x (a) that the lower court gravely abused its discretion” in recognizing the action as one for declaration of “nullity of marriage” instead of a “special proceeding for cancellation of (an) entry” in the civil registry and (b) in not finding that the “lower court had no jurisdiction (over) the issue of nullity”. and 2. BELDIA. 1958).THIRD DIVISION [G. Republic.R. April 2. or some harmless and innocuous change such as a correction of name that is clearly misspelled or of a mis-statement of the occupation of the parent. “A clerical error is one which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding. not material or substantial ones like the validity or nullity of a marriage. LEONOR vs. JR and MAURICIO D. Nov. ROLINDO D. JR Facts: The petition assailed the respondent Court’s Decision and Order mentioned in the second paragraph of this Decision for alleged 1. COURT OF APPEALS. HON. the same cannot be granted except only in an adversarial proceeding. No. “Substantive errors x x x in not finding x x x (a) that the lower court gravely erred in declaring the marriage null and void x x x and (b) x x x in disregarding the presumptions in favor of the rights of children and to the administration of the conjugal property x x x and the validity of marriage x x x. Eric-John Soriano Calagui Page 26 of 26 . 1996] VIRGINIA A. error made by a clerk or a transcriber. 112597. Where the effect of a correction in a civil registry will change the civil status of petitioner and her children from legitimate to illegitimate.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful