179 Republic v. Capote (JH) d.
The father, Diosdado Gallamaso, from the time Giovanni was
February 2, 2007 | CORONA, J | RA No. 9255 [re: Allowing Illegitimate Children to
Use the Surname of their Father]
Petitioner: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
Respondents: TRINIDAD R.A. CAPOTE
SUMMARY: Trinidad Capote filed a petition for change of name of her ward from
Giovanni N. Gallamaso to Giovanni Nadores and to effect the change of name on
Giovanni’s birth certificate. Giovanni is an illegitimate child of Corazon Nadores
and Diosdado Galllamaso. Diosdado failed to take up his responsibilities as a
father. The trial court allowed the petition after finding that it was sufficient in form
and substance. Publication of the petition was made in a newspaper of general
circulation for three consecutive weeks with the order of the court to serve the
petition to the OSG. There was no contest on the petition so the trial court granted
the change of name. The OSG appeals on the basis that the proceedings were not
sufficiently adversarial.
ISSUE: W/N Giovanni should be entitled to change his name. YES
An illegitimate child shall bear the name of the mother as based on the Family
Code, unless legitimated. Giovanni is entitled to a change of name because he
was never recognized as the child of the father, while the mother always
recognized him as her child. The SC also noted that it is in the interest of the court
to grant the petition so that it would ease the process of Capote’s son to join her in
the United States.
DOCTRINE: An illegitimate child whose filiation is not recognized by the father
bears only a given name and his mother' surname, and does not have a middle
name. The name of the unrecognized illegitimate child therefore identifies him as
such.
FACTS:
1. Trinidad R. A. Capote filed a petition for change of name of her ward from
Giovanni N. Gallamaso to Giovanni Nadores.
2. In her petition, she averred the following:
a. GIOVANNI N. GALLAMASO, is a Filipino citizen and a minor at 16
years old
b. Capote was appointed guardian ad litem of Giovanni N. Gallamaso
by virtue of a court order in a separate Special Proceeding which
authorizes her to file in court a petition for change of name of said
minor in accordance with the desire of his mother who is residing
and working abroad.
c. GIOVANNI N. GALLAMASO is the illegitimate natural child of
Corazon P. Nadores and Diosdado Gallamaso. As he was born on
prior to the effectivity of the New Family Code, his mother used the
surname of the natural father despite the absence of marriage
between them.
born and up to the present, failed to take up his responsibilities
to him on matters of financial, physical, emotional and spiritual
concerns.
3. Respondent prayed for an order directing the local civil registrar to effect
the change of name on Giovanni's birth certificate.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
1. RTC – In favor of change of name:
a. Ordered for publication of the petition in a newspaper of general
circulation in the province of Southern Leyte once a week for
three consecutive weeks was likewise ordered. The RTC also
directed that the local civil registrar be notified and that the
Office of the Solicitor General be sent a copy of the petition and
order.
b. Since there was no opposition to the petition, respondent
moved for leave of court to present her evidence ex parte
before a court-appointed commissioner. The OSG, acting
through the Provincial Prosecutor, did not object; hence, the
lower court granted the motion.
2. From this decision, petitioner Republic, through the OSG, filed an appeal
with a lone assignment of error: the court a quo erred in granting the
petition in a summary proceeding.
3. CA: the CA affirmed. Ruling that the proceedings were sufficiently
adversarial in nature as required. The RTC decision ordering the change
of name.
4. PETITIONER’S CONTENTION: that the CA erred in affirming the tri- al
court’s decision, which granted the petition for change of name despite
the non-joinder of indispensable parties. The Republic cites Republic of
the Philippines v. Labrador and claims that the purported parents and all
other persons who may be adversely affected by the child’s change of
name should have been made respondents to make the proceeding
adversarial.
ISSUE/S:
1. W/N the proceedings were sufficiently adversarial. YES
2. W/N Giovanni should be entitled to change his name. YES (IMPT)
RATIO:
On whether the proceedings were sufficiently adversarial. YES
1. The issue of non-joinder of alleged indispensable parties in the action
before the court a quo is intertwined with the nature of the proceedings
there. The point is whether the proceedings were sufficiently adversarial.
2. Summary proceedings do not extensively address the issues of a case
since the reason for their conduct is expediency. This, according to
1
 petitioner, is not sufficient to deal with substantial or contentious issues
allegedly resulting from a change of name, meaning, legitimacy as well as
successional rights. Such issues are ventilated only in adversarial
proceedings wherein all interested parties are impleaded and due process
is observed.
3. The Rules of Court provides the requirements and procedure for change of
name. Here, the appropriate remedy is covered by Rule 103, a separate
and distinct proceeding from Rule 108 on mere cancellation and correction
of entries in the civil registry (usually dealing only with innocuous or clerical
errors thereon).
4. "The subject of rights must have a fixed symbol for individualization which
serves to distinguish him from all others; this symbol is his name."
Understandably, therefore, no person can change his name or surname
without judicial authority. This is a reasonable requirement for those seeking
such change because a person's name necessarily affects his identity,
interests and interactions. The State must be involved in the process and
decision to change the name of any of its citizens.
5. A proceeding is adversarial where the party seeking relief has given legal
warning to the other party and afforded the latter an opportunity to contest
it. Respondent gave notice of the petition through publication as required by
the rules.25 With this, all interested parties were deemed notified and the
whole world considered bound by the judgment therein. In addition, the trial
court gave due notice to the OSG by serving a copy of the petition on it.
Thus, all the requirements to make a proceeding adversarial were satisfied
when all interested parties, including petitioner as represented by the OSG,
were afforded the opportunity to contest the petition.
6. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the cases cited by petitioner in support of its
position deal with cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry, a
proceeding separate and distinct from the special proceedings for change of
name. Those cases deal with the application and interpretation of Rule 108
of the Rules of Court while this case was correctly filed under Rule 103.
Thus, the cases cited by petitioner are irrelevant and have no bearing on
respondent's case. While the OSG is correct in its stance that the
proceedings for change of name should be adversarial, the OSG cannot
void the proceedings in the trial court on account of its own failure to
participate therein.
On whether Giovanni should be entitled to change his name. YES (IMPT)
1. When Giovanni was born in 1982 (prior to the effectivity of the Family Code
of the Philippines), the pertinent provision of the Civil Code then as regards
his use of a surname:
a. Art. 366. A natural child acknowledged by both parents shall
principally use the surname of the father. If recognized by only one
of the parents, a natural child shall employ the surname of the
recognizing parent.
2. Based on this provision, Giovanni should have carried his mother's
surname from birth. The records do not reveal any act or intention on the
part of Giovanni's putative father to actually recognize him.
3. According to the Family Code which repealed, among others, Article 366
of the Civil Code:
a. Art. 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall
be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be
entitled to support in conformity with this Code.
4. The ruling in the recent case of In Re: Petition for Change of Name
and/or Correction/Cancellation of Entry in Civil Registry of Julian Lin
Carulasan Wang is enlightening:
a. Our laws on the use of surnames state that legitimate and
legitimated children shall principally use the surname of the
father. The Family Code gives legitimate children the right to
bear the surnames of the father and the mother, while
illegitimate children shall use the surname of their mother,
unless their father recognizes their filiation, in which case they
may bear the father's surname.
b. Applying these laws, an illegitimate child whose filiation is
not recognized by the father bears only a given name and
his mother' surname, and does not have a middle name.
The name of the unrecognized illegitimate child therefore
identifies him as such. It is only when the illegitimate child is
legitimated by the subsequent marriage of his parents or
acknowledged by the father in a public document or private
handwritten instrument that he bears both his mother's
surname as his middle name and his father's surname as his
surname, reflecting his status as a legitimated child or an
acknowledged child.
5. The foregoing discussion establishes the significant connection of a
person's name to his identity, his status in relation to his parents and his
successional rights as a legitimate or illegitimate child. For sure, these
matters should not be taken lightly as to deprive those who may, in any
way, be affected by the right to present evidence in favor of or against
such change.
DISPOSITION:
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED and the January 13, 2003 decision
of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 66128 AFFIRMED.