IN THE MATTER OF THE CHANGE OF NAMES OF SECAN KOK and MARILYN SE

SECAN KOK vs. REPUBLIC

FACTS: On May 28, 1964 Secan Kok filed a petition to change his name and that of his daughter
Marilyn Se to Antonio Cuakok and Gloria Cuakok respectively. In his petition, there was mention
of his other six (6) minor children as having born out of his marriage in the Catholic church but
without significantly mentioning the name of his wife Lucia O. Tee.

Secan Kok is a prosperous businessman, Chinese citizen, born of Chinese parents in China on
September 7, 1917. In 1928, he came to City of Manila, Philippines where he resided for ten
(10) years. In 1938, he transferred to Cotabato City where he continuously resided. He has an
Alien Certicate of Registration issued by the Bureau of Immigration in 1950 and a Certifcate of
Legalization of Residence dated January 24, 1947.

Secan Kok’s true Chinese name is “Cua Kian Cok” but by clerical mistake committed by
immigration official who preprares his registration papers, he is officially called Secan Kok. Upon
his conversion and baptism to Catholicism in 1947, he adopted the name Antonio Cua. In the
same year he married a Filipina, Lucia O. Tee, of which he had seven (7) children who were
minors during the filing of the petition. The reason for the petition is to avoid further confussion
and embarrassment with his legal and Christian name.

He also included the name of his eldest daughter “Marilyn” whose name in official and school
records is “Maria Gloria Cua”. “Marylin” is her daughter’s baptismal name but she has been
called “Gloria” since her childhood. Thus, to also avoid confusion, he wished to change her
daughter’s name to “Gloria Cuakok”.

CFI in Cotabato granted the petition on July 28, 1965.

On January 24, 1966, Secan Kok filed for motion for supplemental judgment alleging that the
Bureau of Immigration refused to change the surname of his wife and their other six (6) minor
children to “Cuakok”, who were then registered in the bureau with the surname “Cua”.

Assistant City Fiscal opposed the motion on the ground that the judgment has long become
final and can no longer be supplemented and that his wife should file for a separate petition to
change her name. However, the court granted the motion for supplemental judgement on
March 30, 1966. Upon MR it was reversed on May 12, 1966. Upon another MR on August 27,
1966, the court reinstated the May 30, 1966 judgment on September 3, 1966. Hence, this
appeal.

ISSUE: Whether or not the wife and six (6) minor children of Secan Kok may change their name
by mere motion?

HELD: No. Section 2 of Rule 103 of the RRC provides that a petition for a change of name shall
be signed an d verified by the person desiring his name to be changed, or some other person in
his behalf. Thus, there is a need for Lucia O. Tee who is already of age, to file a separate petition
in her own behalf and in behalf of her minor children. To allow such will deprive the
government of the required filing fees but will also dispense with the essential requirements
that protects public interest as well as private individuals who may be prejudiced by the change
of name of the petitioner.

Petitions for change of name are proceedings in rem, strict compliance with requirements is
essential, namely, that such verified petition should be (1) published for three (3) successive
weeks in some newspapers of general circulation in the province; and that (2) both the
title/caption of the petition and its body shall recite (a) the name/s or aliases of the applicant;
(b) the cause of name change; and (c) the new name asked for. The reason for these
requirements is that a change of name is a matter of public interest. Failure to comply with
these jurisdictional requirements renders the proceedings null.