G.R.No.198010.August12,2013.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. DR.

NORMAS.LUGSANAYUY,respondent.
Remedial Law; Special Proceedings; Correction of Entries in the
Civil Registry; Adversarial Proceedings; Even substantial errors in
a civil registry may be corrected and the true facts established
provided the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the
appropriate adversary proceeding.Ithasbeensettledinanumber
of cases starting with Republic v. Valencia, 141 SCRA 462 (1986),
thatevensubstantialerrorsinacivilregistrymaybecorrectedand
the true facts established provided the parties aggrieved by the
erroravailthemselvesoftheappropriateadversaryproceeding.The
pronouncement of the Court in that case is illuminating: It is
undoubtedly true that if the subject matter of a petition is not for
thecorrectionofclericalerrorsofaharmlessandinnocuousnature,
but one involving nationality or citizenship, which is indisputably
substantial as well as controverted, affirmative relief cannot be
grantedinaproceedingsummaryinnature.However,itisalsotrue
thatarightinlawmaybeenforcedandawrongmayberemedied
aslongastheappropriate remedy is used.ThisCourtadherestothe
principle that even substantial errors in a civil registry may be
corrected and the true facts established provided the parties
aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriate
adversary proceeding. x x x What is meant by appropriate
adversary proceeding? Blacks Law Dictionary defines adversary
proceeding as follows: One having opposing parties; contested, as
distinguished from an ex parte application, one of which the party
seeking relief has given legal warning to the other party, and
afforded the latter an opportunity to contest it. Excludes an
adoptionproceeding.
Same; Civil Procedure; Notice of Hearing; The fact that the
notice of hearing was published in a newspaper of general
circulation and notice thereof was served upon the State will not
change the nature of the proceedings taken.Respondents birth
certificate shows that her full name is Anita Sy, that she is a
Chinesecitizen
_______________
*THIRDDIVISION.

426

426

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

andalegitimatechildofSyTonandSoteraLugsanay.Infilingthe
petition, however, she seeks the correction of her first name and

surname, her status from legitimate to illegitimate and her

citizenship from Chinese to Filipino. Thus, respondent should
have impleaded and notified not only the Local Civil Registrar but
alsoherparentsandsiblingsasthepersonswhohaveinterestand
are affected by the changes or corrections respondent wanted to
make. The fact that the notice of hearing was published in a
newspaper of general circulation and notice thereof was served
upontheStatewillnotchangethenatureoftheproceedingstaken.
AreadingofSections4and5,Rule108oftheRulesofCourtshows
that the Rules mandate two sets of notices to different potential
oppositors: one given to the persons named in the petition and
another given to other persons who are not named in the petition
but nonetheless may be considered interested or affected parties.
Summonsmust,therefore,beservednotforthepurposeofvesting
the courts with jurisdiction but to comply with the requirements of
fair play and due process to afford the person concerned the
opportunitytoprotecthisinterestifhesochooses.Whiletheremay
becaseswheretheCourtheldthatthefailuretoimpleadandnotify
theaffectedorinterestedpartiesmaybecuredbythepublicationof
the notice of hearing, earnest efforts were made by petitioners in
bringing to court all possible interested parties. Such failure was
likewise excused where the interested parties themselves initiated
thecorrectionsproceedings;whenthereisnoactualorpresumptive
awarenessoftheexistenceoftheinterestedparties;orwhenaparty
isinadvertentlyleftout.
Same; Special Proceedings; Correction of Entries in the Civil
Registry; When a petition for cancellation or correction of an entry
in the civil register involves substantial and controversial
alterations, including those on citizenship, legitimacy of paternity
or filiation, or legitimacy of marriage, a strict compliance with the
requirements of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court is mandated.When
a petition for cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil
registerinvolvessubstantialandcontroversialalterations,including
those on citizenship, legitimacy of paternity or filiation, or
legitimacyofmarriage,astrictcompliancewiththerequirementsof
Rule 108 of the Rules of Court is mandated. If the entries in the
civilregistercouldbecorrectedorchangedthroughmeresummary
proceedingsandnotthroughappropriateactionwhereinallparties
whomaybeaffected
427

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

427

Republic vs. Uy
bytheentriesarenotifiedorrepresented,thedoortofraudorother
mischief would be set open, the consequence of which might be
detrimentalandfarreaching.

PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and

resolutionoftheCourtofAppeals.
ThefactsarestatedintheopinionoftheCourt.
Office of the Solicitor Generalforpetitioner.
Rebolos, Sanchez, Quilisadio Law Officeforrespondent.
PERALTA,J.:
Assailed in this petition for review on certiorari under

Rule45oftheRulesofCourtaretheCourtofAppeals(CA)1
Decision2 dated February 18, 2011 and Resolution3 dated
July27,2011inCAG.R.CVNo.00238MIN.Theassailed
decisiondismissedtheappealfiledbypetitionerRepublicof
thePhilippinesand,consequently,affirmedin tototheJune
28,2004Order4oftheRegionalTrialCourt(RTC),Branch
27, Gingoog City in Special Proceedings No. 2302004
grantingthePetitionforCorrectionofEntryofCertificate
of Live Birth filed by respondent Dr. Norma S. Lugsanay
Uy;whiletheassailedresolutiondeniedpetitionersmotion
forreconsideration.
Thefactsofthecaseareasfollows:
_______________
1MindanaoStation,CagayandeOroCity.
2 Penned by Associate Justice Rodrigo F. Lim, Jr., with Associate
Justices Angelita A. Gacutan and Nina G. AntonioValenzuela,
concurring;Rollo,pp.4761.
3 Penned by Associate Justice Rodrigo F. Lim, Jr., with Associate
JusticesPamelaAnnAbellaMaxinoandZenaidaT.GalapateLaguilles,
concurring;Rollo,pp.6263.
4PennedbyPresidingJudgeRexelN.Pacuribot;records,pp.2729.
428

428

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

On March 8, 2004, respondent filed a Petition for

Correction of Entry in her Certificate of Live Birth.5
Impleaded as respondent is the Local Civil Registrar of
GingoogCity.SheallegedthatshewasbornonFebruary8,
1952andistheillegitimatedaughterofSyTonandSotera
Lugsanay.6 Her Certificate of Live Birth7 shows that her
fullnameisAnitaSywheninfactsheisallegedlyknown
to her family and friends as Norma S. Lugsanay. She
further claimed that her school records, Professional
Regulation Commission (PRC) Board of Medicine
Certificate,8 and passport9 bear the name Norma S.
Lugsanay.Shealsoallegedthatsheisanillegitimatechild
consideringthatherparentswerenevermarried,soshehad
to follow the surname of her mother.10 She also contended
that she is a Filipino citizen and not Chinese, and all her
siblingsbearthesurnameLugsanayandareallFilipinos.11
Respondent allegedly filed earlier a petition for
correction of entries with the Office of the Local Civil
Registrar of Gingoog City to effect the corrections on her
name and citizenship which was supposedly granted.12
However, the National Statistics Office (NSO) records did
notbearsuchchanges.Hence,thepetitionbeforetheRTC.
OnMay13,2004,theRTCissuedanOrder13findingthe
petition to be sufficient in form and substance and setting
thecaseforhearing,withthedirectivethatthesaidOrder
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the
City of Gingoog and the Province of Misamis Oriental at
leastoncea

_______________
5Records,pp.25.
6Id.,atp.2.
7Id.,atp.6.
8Id.,atp.9.
9Id.,atp.8.
10Rollo,pp.4849.
11Id.,atp.10.
12Id.
13Records,p.13.
429

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

429

Republic vs. Uy
week for three (3) consecutive weeks at the expense of
respondent,andthattheorderandpetitionbefurnishedthe
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the City
Prosecutors Office for their information and guidance.14
PursuanttotheRTCOrder,respondentcompliedwiththe
publicationrequirement.
On June 28, 2004, the RTC issued an Order in favor of
respondent,thedispositiveportionofwhichreads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is
herebyGRANTED.THECITYCIVILREGISTRAROFGINGOOG
CITY, or any person acting in his behalf is directed and ordered
toeffectthecorrectionorchangeoftheentriesintheCertificate
of Live Birth of petitioners name and citizenship so that the
entrieswouldbe:
a)Astopetitionersname:
FirstName:NORMA
MiddleName:SY
LastName:LUGSANAY
b)Astopetitionersnationality/citizenship:FILIPINO
SOORDERED.15

The RTC concluded that respondents petition would

neither prejudice the government nor any third party. It
alsoheldthatthenamesNormaSyLugsanayandAnita
Sy refer to one and the same person, especially since the
Local Civil Registrar of Gingoog City has effected the
correction. Considering that respondent has continuously
used and has been known since childhood as Norma Sy
Lugsanay and as a Filipino citizen, the RTC granted the
petitiontoavoidconfusion.16
_______________
14Id.
15Id.,atpp.2829.
16Id.,atpp.2728.
430

430

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

OnFebruary18,2011,theCAaffirmedintototheRTC
Order. The CA held that respondents failure to implead
otherindispensablepartieswascureduponthepublication
oftheOrdersettingthecaseforhearinginanewspaperof
general circulation for three (3) consecutive weeks and by
servingacopyofthenoticetotheLocalCivilRegistrar,the
OSG and the City Prosecutors Office.17 As to whether the
petition is a collateral attack on respondents filiation, the
CA ruled in favor of respondent, considering that her
parentswerenotlegallymarriedandthathersiblingsbirth
certificatesuniformlystatethattheirsurnameisLugsanay
and their citizenship is Filipino.18 Petitioners motion for
reconsideration was denied in a Resolution dated July 27,
2011.
Hence, the present petition on the sole ground that the
petition is dismissible for failure to implead indispensable
parties.
Cancellationorcorrectionofentriesinthecivilregistry
isgovernedbyRule108oftheRulesofCourt,towit:
SEC.1.Who may file petition.Anypersoninterestedin
any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of
personswhichhasbeenrecordedinthecivilregister,mayfile
a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any
entry relating thereto, with the Regional Trial Court of the
provincewherethecorrespondingcivilregistryislocated.
SEC.2.Entries
subject
to
cancellation
or
correction.Upon good and valid grounds, the following
entries in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected: (a)
births; (b) marriages; (c) deaths; (d) legal separations; (e)
judgments of annulments of marriage; (f) judgments
declaring marriages void from the beginning; (g)
legitimations; (h) adoptions; (i) acknowledgments of natural
children; (j) naturalization; (k) election, loss or recovery of
citizenship;(l)civilinterdiction;(m)judicialdetermi
_______________
17Rollo,p.15.
18Id.,atp.20.
431

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

431

Republic vs. Uy
nationoffiliation;(n)voluntaryemancipationofaminor;and
(o)changesofname.
SEC.3.Parties.When cancellation or correction
of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil
registrar and all persons who have or claim any
interest which would be affected thereby shall be
made parties to the proceeding.
SEC. 4.Notice and Publication.Upon the filing
of the petition, the court shall, by an order, fix the
time and place for the hearing of the same, and cause
reasonable notice thereof to be given to the persons
named in the petition. 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.

SEC.5. Opposition.The civil registrar and any
person having or claiming any interest under the
entry whose cancellation or correction is sought may,
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the petition, or
from the last date of publication of such notice, file his
opposition thereto.
SEC. 6.Expediting proceedings.The court in which
the proceeding is brought may make orders expediting the
proceedings, and may also grant preliminary injunction for
the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such
proceedings.
SEC.7. Order.After hearing, the court may either
dismiss the petition or issue an order granting the
cancellationorcorrectionprayedfor.Ineithercase,acertified
copy of the judgment shall be served upon the civil registrar
concernedwhoshallannotatethesameinhisrecord.19

Inthiscase,respondentsoughtthecorrectionofentries
inherbirthcertificate,particularlythosepertainingtoher
first name, surname and citizenship. She sought the
correction
_______________
19Emphasissupplied.
432

432

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

allegedlytoreflectthenamewhichshehasbeenknown
for since childhood, including her legal documents such as
passport and school and professional records. She likewise
reliedonthebirthcertificatesofherfullbloodsiblingswho
bear the surname Lugsanay instead of Sy and
citizenship of Filipino instead of Chinese. The changes,
however, are obviously not mere clerical as they touch on
respondents filiation and citizenship. In changing her
surnamefromSy(whichisthesurnameofherfather)to
Lugsanay (which is the surname of her mother), she, in
effect, changes her status from legitimate to illegitimate;
and in changing her citizenship from Chinese to Filipino,
thesameaffectsherrightsandobligationsinthiscountry.
Clearly,thechangesaresubstantial.
It has been settled in a number of cases starting with
Republic v. Valencia20thatevensubstantialerrorsinacivil
registry may be corrected and the true facts established
providedthepartiesaggrievedbytheerroravailthemselves
of the appropriate adversary proceeding.21 The
pronouncementoftheCourtinthatcaseisilluminating:
It is undoubtedly true that if the subject matter of a
petitionisnotforthecorrectionofclericalerrorsofaharmless
and innocuous nature, but one involving nationality or
citizenship, which is indisputably substantial as well as
controverted, affirmative relief cannot be granted in a
proceedingsummaryinnature.However,itisalsotruethata

right in law may be enforced and a wrong may be remedied

aslongastheappropriate remedy is used.ThisCourtadheres
totheprinciplethatevensubstantialerrorsinacivilregistry
may be corrected and the true facts established provided the
parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the
appropriateadversaryproceeding.xxx
_______________
20225Phil.408;141SCRA462(1986).
21Republic v. Valencia, supra,atp.416;pp.468469.
433

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

433

Republic vs. Uy
What is meant by appropriate adversary proceeding?
Blacks Law Dictionary defines adversary proceeding as
follows:
One having opposing parties; contested, as
distinguishedfromanex parteapplication,oneofwhich
thepartyseekingreliefhasgivenlegalwarningtothe
other party, and afforded the latter an opportunity to
contestit.Excludesanadoptionproceeding.22

In sustaining the RTC decision, the CA relied on the

Courts conclusion in Republic v. Kho,23 Alba v. Court of
Appeals,24andBarco v. Court of Appeals,25thatthefailure
to implead indispensable parties was cured by the
publication of the notice of hearing pursuant to the
provisionsofRule108oftheRulesofCourt.InRepublic v.
Kho,26 petitioner therein appealed the RTC decision
granting the petition for correction of entries despite
respondents failure to implead the minors mother as an
indispensable party. The Court, however, did not strictly
apply the provisions of Rule 108, because it opined that it
washighlyimprobablethatthemotherwasunawareofthe
proceedings to correct the entries in her childrens birth
certificatesespeciallysincethenotices,ordersanddecision
of the trial court were all sent to the residence she shared
withthem.27
InAlba v. Court of Appeals,28 the Court found nothing
wrong with the trial courts decision granting the petition
for correction of entries filed by respondent although the
proceedings was not actually known by petitioner. In that
case,peti
_______________
22Id.(Citationomitted;italicsintheoriginal)
23G.R.No.170340,June29,2007,526SCRA177.
24503Phil.451;465SCRA495(2005).
25465Phil.39;420SCRA162(2004).
26Supranote23.
27Republic v. Kho, supranote23,atp.191.
28Supranote24.
434

434

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

tionersmotherandguardianwasimpleadedinthepetition
forcorrectionofentries,andnoticesweresenttoheraddress
appearing in the subject birth certificate. However, the
notice was returned unserved, because apparently she no
longerlivedthere.Thus,whensheallegedlylearnedofthe
granting of the petition, she sought the annulment of
judgment which the Court denied. Considering that the
petitionforcorrectionofentriesisaproceedingin rem,the
Courtheldthatacquisitionofjurisdictionoverthepersonof
thepetitioneris,therefore,notrequiredandtheabsenceof
personal service was cured by the trial courts compliance
withRule108whichrequiresnoticebypublication.29
InBarco v. Court of Appeals,30 the Court addressed the
question of whether the court acquired jurisdiction over
petitionerandallotherindispensablepartiestothepetition
forcorrectionofentriesdespitethefailuretoimpleadthem
in said case. While recognizing that petitioner was indeed
anindispensableparty,thefailuretoimpleadherwascured
by compliance with Section 4 of Rule 108 which requires
notice by publication. In so ruling, the Court pointed out
that the petitioner in a petition for correction cannot be
presumedtobeawareofallthepartieswhoseinterestsmay
beaffectedbythegrantingofapetition.Itemphasizedthat
thepetitionerthereinexertedearnestefforttocomplywith
the provisions of Rule 108. Thus, the publication of the
noticeofhearingwasconsideredtohavecuredthefailureto
impleadindispensableparties.
In this case, it was only the Local Civil Registrar of
Gingoog City who was impleaded as respondent in the
petitionbelow.This,notwithstanding,theRTCgrantedher
petition and allowed the correction sought by respondent,
whichdecisionwasaffirmedin totobytheCA.
WedonotagreewiththeRTCandtheCA.
_______________
29Alba v. Court of Appeals, supranote24,atp.460;p.507.
30 Supranote25.
435

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

435

Republic vs. Uy
ThisisnotthefirsttimethattheCourtisconfrontedwith
the issue involved in this case. Aside from Kho, Alba and
Barco, the Court has addressed the same in Republic v.
CosetengMagpayo,31 Ceruila v. Delantar,32 and Labayo
Rowe v. Republic.33
In Republic v. CosetengMagpayo,34 claiming that his
parentswereneverlegallymarried,respondentthereinfiled
a petition to change his name from Julian Edward
Emerson Coseteng Magpayo, the name appearing in his
birth certificate to Julian Edward Emerson Marquez Lim
Coseteng. The notice setting the petition for hearing was

published and there being no opposition thereto, the trial

court issued an order of general default and eventually
grantedrespondentspetitiondeletingtheentryonthedate
and place of marriage of parties; correcting his surname
from Magpayo to Coseteng; deleting the entry
Cosetengformiddlename;anddeletingtheentryFulvio
Miranda Magpayo, Jr. in the space for his father. The
RepublicofthePhilippines,throughtheOSG,assailedthe
RTCdecisiononthegroundsthatthecorrectionsmadeon
respondentsbirthcertificatehadtheeffectofchangingthe
civilstatusfromlegitimatetoillegitimateandmustonlybe
effectedthroughanappropriateadversaryproceeding.The
CourtnullifiedtheRTCdecisionforrespondentsfailureto
complystrictlywiththeprocedurelaiddowninRule108of
theRulesofCourt.Asidefromthewrongremedyavailedof
by respondent as he filed a petition for Change of Name
underRule103oftheRulesofCourt,assumingthathefiled
apetitionunderRule108whichistheappropriateremedy,
the petition still failed because of improper venue and
failuretoimpleadtheCivilRegistrarofMakatiCityandall
affectedpartiesasrespondentsinthecase.
_______________
31G.R.No.189476,February2,2011,641SCRA533.
32513Phil.237;477SCRA134(2005).
33250Phil.300;168SCRA294(1988).
34Supranote31.
436

436

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

InCeruila v. Delantar,35theCeruilasfiledapetitionfor
the cancellation and annulment of the birth certificate of
respondent on the ground that the same was made as an
instrumentofthecrimeofsimulationofbirthand,therefore,
invalid and spurious, and it falsified all material entries
therein. The RTC issued an order setting the case for
hearing with a directive that the same be published and
that any person who is interested in the petition may
interpose his comment or opposition on or before the
scheduledhearing.SummonswaslikewisesenttotheCivil
RegisterofManila.Afterwhich,thetrialcourtgrantedthe
petition and nullified respondents birth certificate. Few
monthsafter,respondentfiledapetitionfortheannulment
of judgment claiming that she and her guardian were not
notifiedofthepetitionandthetrialcourtsdecision,hence,
thelatterwasissuedwithoutjurisdictionandinviolationof
herrighttodueprocess.TheCourtannulledthetrialcourts
decisionforfailuretocomplywiththerequirementsofRule
108, especially the nonimpleading of respondent herself
whosebirthcertificatewasnullified.
InLabayoRowe v. Republic,36 petitioner filed a petition
for the correction of entries in the birth certificates of her
children, specifically to change her name from Beatriz V.
Labayu/Beatriz Labayo to Emperatriz Labayo, her civil
statusfrommarriedtosingle,andthedateandplaceof

marriage from 1953Bulan to No marriage. The Court

modifiedthetrialcourtsdecisionbynullifyingtheportion
thereof which directs the change of petitioners civil status
aswellasthefiliationofherchild,becauseitwastheOSG
onlythatwasmaderespondentandtheproceedingstaken
wassummaryinnaturewhichisshortofwhatisrequiredin
caseswheresubstantialalterationsaresought.
Respondentsbirthcertificateshowsthatherfullnameis
Anita Sy, that she is a Chinese citizen and a legitimate
child
_______________
35Supranote32.
36Supranote33.
437

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

437

Republic vs. Uy
of Sy Ton and Sotera Lugsanay. In filing the petition,
however, she seeks the correction of her first name and
surname, her status from legitimate to illegitimate and
her citizenship from Chinese to Filipino. Thus,
respondentshouldhaveimpleadedandnotifiednotonlythe
Local Civil Registrar but also her parents and siblings as
the persons who have interest and are affected by the
changesorcorrectionsrespondentwantedtomake.
The fact that the notice of hearing was published in a
newspaper of general circulation and notice thereof was
served upon the State will not change the nature of the
proceedingstaken.37AreadingofSections4and5,Rule108
oftheRulesofCourtshowsthattheRulesmandatetwosets
ofnoticestodifferentpotentialoppositors:onegiventothe
persons named in the petition and another given to other
personswhoarenotnamedinthepetitionbutnonetheless
maybeconsideredinterestedoraffectedparties.38Summons
must,therefore,beservednotforthepurposeofvestingthe
courtswithjurisdictionbuttocomplywiththerequirements
offairplayanddueprocesstoaffordthepersonconcerned
theopportunitytoprotecthisinterestifhesochooses.39
WhiletheremaybecaseswheretheCourtheldthatthe
failure to implead and notify the affected or interested
parties may be cured by the publication of the notice of
hearing, earnest efforts were made by petitioners in
bringing to court all possible interested parties.40 Such
failure was likewise excused where the interested parties
themselves initiated the corrections proceedings;41 when
thereisnoactualorpresump
_______________
37LabayoRowe v. Republic, supranote33,atp.301.
38Republic v. CosetengMagpayo, supranote31,atp.543.
39Ceruila v. Delantar, supranote32,atp.252;p.148.
40Id.
41Republic v. Kho, supranote23,atp.193.
438

438

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Republic vs. Uy

tiveawarenessoftheexistenceoftheinterestedparties;42or
whenapartyisinadvertentlyleftout.43
It is clear from the foregoing discussion that when a
petitionforcancellationorcorrectionofanentryinthecivil
register involves substantial and controversial alterations,
including those on citizenship, legitimacy of paternity or
filiation,orlegitimacyofmarriage,astrictcompliancewith
the requirements of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court is
mandated.44 If the entries in the civil register could be
corrected or changed through mere summary proceedings
andnotthroughappropriateactionwhereinallpartieswho
may be affected by the entries are notified or represented,
the door to fraud or other mischief would be set open, the
consequence of which might be detrimental and far
reaching.45
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is
hereby GRANTED. The Court of Appeals Decision dated
February18,2011andResolutiondatedJuly27,20011in
CAG.R. CV No. 00238MIN, are SET ASIDE.
Consequently, the June 28, 2004 Order of the Regional
TrialCourt,Branch27,GingoogCity,inSpl.Proc.No.230
2004 granting the Petition for Correction of Entry of
Certificate of Live Birth filed by respondent Dr. Norma S.
LugsanayUy,isNULLIFIED.
SO ORDERED.
Velasco, Jr. (Chairperson), Abad, MendozaandLeonen,
JJ.,concur.
Petition granted, judgment and resolution set aside.
_______________
42Barco v. Court of Appeals, supra note25,atp.172;p.178.
43Republic v. CosetengMagpayo, supra note31,atp.545.
44Id.,atp.546.
45LabayoRowe v. Republic, supra note33,atp.307;p.300.
439

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013

439

Republic vs. Uy
Notes.In a special proceeding for correction of entry
underRule108(CancellationorCorrectionofEntriesinthe
Original Registry), the trial court has no jurisdiction to
nullify marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation.
(Braza vs. City Civil Registrar of Himamaylan City, Negros
Occidental,607SCRA638[2009])
In petitions for change of name, a person avails of a
remedytoalterthedesignationbywhichheisknownand
called in the community in which he lives and is best
known; Judicial permission for a change of name aims to
preventfraudandtoensurearecordofthechangebyvirtue

of a court decree. (Republic vs. Mercadera, 637 SCRA 654

[2010])
o0o

Copyright 2015 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.