Maria del Rosario Mariategui vs. CA G.R. No. 57062, Jan.

24, 1992 FACTS: This is a case for partition of several pieces of land belonging to Lupo Mariategui, who died without a will. During his lifetime, Lupo contracted three (3) marriages. The first wife died, so he contracted a second marriage. The second wife also passed away so he contracted a third marriage. The third wife also preceded Lupo in death. The issue in this case arose because at the time of his death, Lupo left certain properties which he acquired when he was still unmarried. Later, Lupo¶s descendants by his first and second marriages executed a deed of extrajudicial partition whereby they adjudicated unto themselves a certain lot of the Muntinglupa Estate and title was issued. Now, Lupo¶s children by his third marriage filed a complaint with the lower court, contending that since they were co-heirs of Lupo¶s estate they were deprived of their respective shares in the lot mentioned. In answer, the other party said that the complaint was not really for annulment of the deed of extrajudicial partition but for recognition of natural children. The lower court ruled in favor of Lupo¶s heirs from the first and second marriage. Thus, the case was elevated to the CA, where they raised the issue of their parents¶ lawful marriage and their legitimacy as children. CA ruled that all the heirs of Lupo were entitled to equal shares in the estate. Hence, this petition. ISSUES: y Whether or not the action for partition has prescribed y Whether or not the private respondents are entitled to successional rights over the said lot HELD: The case is really one for partition. The question of the status of the private respondents was raised only collaterally to assert their rights in the estate of the deceased. Existence of the Marriage Lupo and Felipa were alleged to have been lawfully married in or about 1930. This fact is based on the declaration communicated by Lupo to his son who testified that ³when his father was still living, he was able to mention to him that he and his mother were able to get married before a Justice of the Peace of Taguig, Rizal.´ The spouses deported themselves as husband and wife, and were known in the community to be such. Although no marriage certificate was introduced to this effect, no evidence was likewise offered to controvert these facts. Moreover, the mere fact that no record of the marriage exists does not invalidate the marriage, provided all the requisites for its validity are present. Under these circumstances, a marriage may be presumed to have taken place between Lupo and Felipa. The laws presume that a man and a woman, deporting themselves as husband and wife, have entered into a lawful contract of marriage; that a child born in lawful wedlock, there being no divorce, absolute or from bed and board is legitimate; and that things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life. Courts look upon the presumption of marriage with great favor as it is founded on the following rationale: ³The basis of human society throughout the civilized world is that of marriage. Marriage in this jurisdiction is not only a civil contract, but it is a new relation, an institution in the maintenance of which the public is deeply interested. Consequently, every intendment of the law leans towards legalizing matrimony. Persons dwelling together in apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of any counterpresumption or evidence special to that case, to be in fact married. The reason is that such is the

For its part. Prescription of Action for Partition In view of the foregoing. Hence this petition. another. As proof of this. 83598. Julian and Paulina. predeceasing their parents. CA G. prescription does not run against private respondents with respect to the filing of the action for partition so long as the heirs for whose benefit prescription is invoked. Leoncia Balogbog vs. the failure to present it is not proof that no marriage took place. Jacinto¶s birth certificate was a record of birth referred to in Article 172 of the Code. the time limitation prescribed in Article 285 for filing an action for recognition is inapplicable to this case. FACTS: This is an action for partition brought by Ramonito and Generoso Balogbog against Leoncia and Gaudioso Balogbog. the presumption of their being married must be admitted as a fact. CA affirmed. Petition dismissed. In the case of the two other private respondents. they would be living in the constant violation of decency and of law.´ So much so that once a man and a woman have lived as husband and wife and such relationship is not denied nor contradicted. and that things happen according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life. March 7. no evidence which tends to disprove facts contained therein was adduced before the lower court. they presented certificates showing that there was no record in the Register of both the marriage between Gavino and Catalina and the birth of Ramonito.common order of society and if the parties were not what they thus hold themselves out as being. Filiation Evidence on record proves the legitimate filiation of the private respondents. the elder brother of Leoncia and Gaudioso. have not expressly or impliedly repudiated the co-ownership. In other words. ISSUE: y Whether or not the presumption of marriage applies y Whether or not Ramonito and Generoso were legitimate children of Gavino . No. Gavino died in 1935. Ramonito and Generoso claimed that they were the legitimate children of Catalina and Gavino. they may not have presented in evidence any of the documents required by Article 172 but they continuously enjoyed the status of children of Lupo in the same manner as their brother Jacinto. defendants denied knowing Ramonito and Generoso and claimed that Gavino died single and without issue. The lower court rendered judgment in favor of Ramonito and Generoso. Ramonito and Generoso presented witnesses: one. and Catalina herself. Again. there can be no other conclusion than that private respondents are legitimate children and heirs of Lupo and therefore. Corollarily. prescription of an action for partition does not lie except when the co-ownership is properly repudiated by the co-owner. the mayor of Asturias from 1928 to 1934. the grandparents of Ramonito and Generoso.R. holding that private respondents failed to overcome the legal presumption that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife are in fact married. who was a family friend. 1997 y y Presumption of marriage Although a marriage contract is considered primary evidence of marriage. that a child is presumed to be legitimate.

Legitimacy of Children The SC held that the fact that there was no record of birth in the Civil Registry does not mean that Ramonito and Generoso were not legitimate children. Cheong Seng Gee: The basis of human society throughout the civilized world is that of marriage. there was submitted an official transcript of an investigation before the Police Investigation Committee of Balamban. Persons dwelling together in apparent matrimony are presumed. Consequently.HELD: The SC found no reversible error committed by the CA. the failure to present it is not proof that no marriage took place. and if the parties were not what they thus hold themselves out as being. This presumption may be rebutted only by cogent proof to the contrary. which repealed the provisions of the former Civil Code. Consequently. although a marriage contract is considered primary evidence of marriage. because the State is interested in the preservation of the family and the sanctity of the family is a matter of constitutional concern. Rationale for the presumption The law favors the validity of marriage. having been suspended by the Governor General of the Philippines shortly after the extension of that code to this country. Always presume marriage. but it is a new relation. and the rules on evidence. Under the Rules of Court. The reason is that such is the common order of society. to be in fact married. Adong vs.´ Semper praesumitur pro matrimonio. A presumption established by our Code of Civil Procedure is ³that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a lawful contract of marriage. Since this case was brought in the lower court in 1968. Other evidence may be presented to prove marriage. wherein Gaudioso himself admitted that Ramonito is his nephew. The Court held this admission of relationship as admissible against Gaudioso as a reliable declaration against interest. the presumption is that a man and a woman conducting themselves as husband and wife are legally married. they would be living in the constant violation of decency and of law. every intendment of the law leans toward legalizing matrimony. Marriage in this jurisdiction is not only a civil contract. Arts. Evidence consisting of the testimonies of witnesses was held competent to prove the marriage. 53 and 54 of the Civil Code of 1889 (only by a certified copy of the memorandum in the Civil Registry) since the marriage was celebrated when such law was in effect. Cebu. But the SC noted that Arts. an institution in the maintenance of which the public is deeply interested. the existence of the marriage must be determined in accordance with the present Civil Code. in the absence of any counter-presumption or evidence special to the case. including Catalina. Petitioner contends that the marriage of Gavino and Catalina should be proven in accordance of Arts. 42 to 107 of the Civil Code of 1889 of Spain did not take effect. the mother herself. Decision affirmed. Indeed. Silverio vs Republic . except as they related to vested rights. 53 and 54 never came into force. Their legitimacy was proved by testimony of witnesses. Moreover.

R. A change of name is a privilege.This is a digest of Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio vs. No. not a right. copying. he must show that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name. More importantly. that provided under RA 9048. A person¶s first name cannot be changed on the ground of sex reassignment The State has an interest in the names borne by individuals and entities for purposes of identification. Section 1 of RA 9048 provides: SECTION 1. It was an improper remedy because the proper remedy was administrative. Facts: The petitioner alleged that his name was registered as ³Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio´ in his birth certificate. He also underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok. (2) The new first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and he has been publicly known by that first name or nickname in the community. while his sex was registered as ³male. that is. He then sought to have his name in his birth certificate changed from ³Rommel Jacinto´ to ³Mely.´ The petition was granted by trial court. Section 2(c) of RA 9048 defines what a clerical or typographical error´ is: Clerical or typographical error refers to a mistake committed in the performance of clerical work in writing. Republic(G. However. RA 9048 now governs the change of first name.´ He further alleged that he is a male transsexual. after having undergone sex reassignment surgery. Petitioner¶s basis in praying for the change of his first name was his sex reassignment. He intended to make his first name compatible with the sex he thought he transformed himself into through surgery.´ Together with Article 376 of the Civil Code. he failed to show. or (3) The change will avoid confusion. â¼³ No entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected without a judicial order. Article 376 of the Civil Code provides that: ³No person can change his name or surname without judicial authority. any prejudice that he might suffer as a result of using his true and official name. In this case. tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult to write or pronounce. In addition. he must present proper or reasonable cause or any compelling reason justifying such change.´ This Civil Code provision was amended by RA 9048 (Clerical Error Law). No law allows the change of entry in the birth certificate as to sex on the ground of sex reassignment. this provision was amended by RA 9048 in so far as clerical or typographical errors are involved. but was reversed by the Court of Appeals. ³anatomically male but feels. it had no merit since the use of his true and official name does not prejudice him at all. RA 9048 does not sanction a change of first name on the ground of sex reassignment.´ and his sex from ³male´ to ³female. Authority to Correct Clerical or Typographical Error and Change of First Name or Nickname. wherein the petitioner sought to have his name in his birth certificate changed from´Rommel Jacinto´ to ³Mely. The Supreme Court affirmed the CA. providing for the following grounds (Sec. Thailand. transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register that is harmless and innocuous. that is. 174689. Before a person can legally change his given name. 4) for which change of first name may be allowed: (1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be ridiculous. and not with the trial court. except for clerical or typographical errors and change of first name or nickname which can be corrected or changed by the concerned city or municipal civil registrar or consul general in accordance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing rules and regulations. assuming it could be legally done. which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding. changing petitioner¶s first name for his declared purpose may only create grave complications in the civil registry and the public interest. or even allege.´ and his sex from ³male´ to ³female´. Article 412 of the Civil Code provides that: ³No entry in the civil register shall be changed or corrected without a judicial order. Rather than avoiding confusion. a change of name does not alter one¶s legal capacity or civil status. In particular. In other words. 22 October 2007). such as misspelled name or misspelled place of birth or the like. and can be corrected or changed only by reference to other existing record or records: . Petitions for change of name are controlled by statutes. thinks and acts as a female´ and that he had always identified himself with girls since childhood. It was also filed in the wrong venue as the proper venue was in the Office of the Civil Registrar of Manila where his birth certificate is kept. the petition should have been filed with the local civil registrar concerned.

CA affirmed the decision of trial court in his criminal case. The entries envisaged in Article 412 of the Civil Code and correctable under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court are those provided in Articles 407 and 408 of the Civil Code. (6) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning. sex reassignment is not among those acts or events mentioned in Article 407. (5) annulments of marriage. (11) loss. 407. the absent spouse has not been judicially declared presumptively dead. or (12) recovery of citizenship. However. naturalization and deaths) and judicial decrees (such as legal separations. were all correct. It is a substantial change for which the applicable procedure is Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. The birth certificate of petitioner contained no error. marriages. She soon filed a petition for divorce with the Ontario Court and was granted. The requisites of bigamy are (1) the offender has been legally married. judicial determination of filiation and changes of name). and (16) changes of name. acknowledgments of illegitimate children and naturalization). The acts. since in the civil case. Held: Yes. ART. (4) legal separations. (10) naturalization. They married each other at Iglesia de Filipina Nacional at Bohol by merely signing a marriage contract by themselves and without solemnization. Issue: Whether or not petitioner committed bigamy and if so. Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals. the trial court ruled his first marriage void ab initio due to the want of marriage ceremony. a correction in the civil registry involving the change of sex is not a mere clerical or typographical error. People Facts: Lucio Morigo and Lucia Barrete were then boardmates for a lengthy period of time until they part ways and lost contact. . (8) adoptions. The following shall be entered in the civil register: (1) Births. 408. naturalization.Provided. Their effects are expressly sanctioned by the laws. whether his defense was good and valid. expressly or impliedly. No correction is necessary. To correct simply means to make or set aright. Lucio remarried with Maria Jececha Lumbago. These acts. annulments of marriage. (9) acknowledgments of natural children. Supreme Court granted his petition and is acquitted from bigamy. Lucio was surprised to receive a card from Lucia. Lucia went back to Canada. trial court discounted petitioner¶s claim that his first marriage to Lucia was null and void ab initio and ruled that want of a valid marriage ceremony is not a defense in a charge of bigamy. (7) legitimations. (14) judicial determination of filiation. he was charged and convicted of bigamy. however. civil interdiction. age. Acts. in accordance with Articles 3 and 4 of the Family Code. declarations of nullity of marriages. Under RA 9048. loss or recovery of citizenship. They maintained constant communication and became sweethearts. ART. events and judicial decrees produce legal consequences that touch upon the legal capacity. In herein criminal case. to remove the faults or error fromâ¼ while to change means to replace something with something else of the same kind or with something that serves as a substitute. all the way from Singapore. (2) the first marriage has not been legally dissolved. Thereafter. In contrast. events (such as births. (3) deaths. (13) civil interdiction. However. That no correction must involve the change of nationality. (2) marriages. status and nationality of a person. Notwithstanding. Article 407 of the Civil Code authorizes the entry in the civil registry of certain acts (such as legitimations. Neither is it recognized nor even mentioned by any law. events or factual errors contemplated under Article 407 of the Civil Code include even those that occur after birth. including those corresponding to his first name and sex. or in case his or her spouse is absent. adoptions. Morigo Vs. After many years. (15) voluntary emancipation of a minor. no reasonable interpretation of the provision can justify the conclusion that it covers the correction on the ground of sex reassignment. All entries therein. events and judicial decrees concerning the civil status of persons shall be recorded in the civil register. Only afterwards did he file for a declaration of nullity before the trial court on the ground of the absence of a marriage ceremony in his first marriage. status or sex of the petitioner.

00 pesos and is STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of a similar act should be punished severely. The complainant at that time was pregnant and begged to the judge to have her and her husband to be married by him. Moreno vs Bernabe Facts: Marilou Nama Moreno and Marcelo Moreno were married before the respondent Judge Jose Bernabe on October 4.(3) he contracts a subsequent marriage. The complainant then filed a complaint allegedly for deceiving her that the marriage is valid. 000. Issue: Whether or not that a Judge who held a wedding without issuing a marriage contract should be held liable even if the complaint had ³expressly´ withdrawn by the complainant. . In the instant case. Lucio and Lucia were not legally married. Ruling: Even with the withdrawal of the complainant against the respondent the Supreme Court insisted that it should still be dealt with accordingly as the accused was a member of the judiciary and a conduct of a higher level were expected. and (4) the subsequent marriage would have been valid had it not been for the existence of the first. The judge displayed ignorance of the law which is unacceptable for his position and is therefore fined with 10. 1993 but did not process the papers for the marriage contract.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful