G.R.No.198010. August12,2013.*

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. DR.NORMAS.LUGSANAYUY,respondent.

Remedial Law; Special Proceedings; Correction of Entries in theCivil Registry; Adversarial Proceedings; Even substantial errors ina civil registry may be corrected and the true facts establishedprovided the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of theappropriate adversary proceeding.―IthasbeensettledinanumberofcasesstartingwithRepublic v. Valencia,141SCRA462 (1986),thatevensubstantialerrorsinacivilregistrymaybecorrectedandthe true facts established provided the parties aggrieved by theerroravailthemselvesoftheappropriateadversaryproceeding.Thepronouncement of the Court in that case is illuminating: It isundoubtedly true that if the subjectmatter of apetition isnot forthecorrectionofclericalerrorsofaharmlessandinnocuousnature,but one involving nationality or citizenship,which is indisputablysubstantial as well as controverted, affirmative relief cannot begrantedinaproceedingsummaryinnature.However,itisalsotruethatarightinlawmaybeenforcedandawrongmayberemediedaslongastheappropriate remedy is used.ThisCourtadherestotheprinciple that even substantial errors in a civil registry may becorrected and the true facts established provided the partiesaggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriateadversary proceeding. x x x What is meant by “appropriateadversary proceeding?” Black’s LawDictionary defines “adversaryproceeding” as follows:One having opposing parties; contested, asdistinguished fromanex parte application, one ofwhich thepartyseeking relief has given legal warning to the other party, andafforded the latter an opportunity to contest it. Excludes anadoptionproceeding.

Same; Civil Procedure; Notice of Hearing; The fact that thenotice of hearing was published in a newspaper of generalcirculation and notice thereof was served upon the State will notchange the nature of the proceedings taken.―Respondent’s birthcertificate shows that her full name is Anita Sy, that she is aChinesecitizen

_______________

*THIRDDIVISION.

426

426 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED

Republic vs. Uy

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

surname, her status from “legitimate” to “illegitimate” and hercitizenship from “Chinese” to “Filipino.” Thus, respondent shouldhave impleadedandnotifiednotonlytheLocalCivilRegistrarbutalsoherparentsandsiblingsasthepersonswhohaveinterestandare affected by the changes or corrections respondent wanted tomake. The fact that the notice of hearing was published in anewspaper of general circulation and notice thereof was servedupontheStatewillnotchangethenatureoftheproceedingstaken.AreadingofSections4and5,Rule108oftheRulesofCourtshowsthat the Rules mandate two sets of notices to different potentialoppositors: one given to the persons named in the petition andanother given to otherpersonswhoarenotnamed in thepetitionbut nonetheless may be considered interested or affected parties.Summonsmust,therefore,beservednotforthepurposeofvestingthecourtswith jurisdictionbuttocomplywiththerequirementsoffair play and due process to afford the person concerned theopportunitytoprotecthisinterestifhesochooses.WhiletheremaybecaseswheretheCourtheldthatthefailuretoimpleadandnotifytheaffectedorinterestedpartiesmaybecuredbythepublicationofthe notice of hearing, earnest efforts weremade by petitioners inbringing to court all possible interested parties. Such failure waslikewise excused where the interested parties themselves initiatedthecorrectionsproceedings;whenthereisnoactualorpresumptiveawarenessoftheexistenceoftheinterestedparties;orwhenapartyisinadvertentlyleftout.

Same; Special Proceedings; Correction of Entries in the CivilRegistry; When a petition for cancellation or correction of an entryin the civil register involves substantial and controversialalterations, including those on citizenship, legitimacy of paternityor filiation, or legitimacy of marriage, a strict compliance with therequirements of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court is mandated.―Whena petition for cancellation or correction of an entry in the civilregisterinvolvessubstantialandcontroversialalterations,includingthose on citizenship, legitimacy of paternity or filiation, orlegitimacyofmarriage,astrictcompliancewiththerequirementsofRule 108 of the Rules of Court ismandated. If the entries in thecivilregistercouldbecorrectedorchangedthroughmeresummaryproceedingsandnotthroughappropriateactionwhereinallpartieswhomaybeaffected

427

VOL.703,AUGUST12,2013 427

Republic vs. Uy

bytheentriesarenotifiedorrepresented,thedoortofraudorothermischief would be set open, the consequence of which might bedetrimentalandfarreaching.

PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision andresolutionoftheCourtofAppeals.

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 andResolution3 datedJuly27,2011inCA­G.R.CVNo.00238­MIN.TheassaileddecisiondismissedtheappealfiledbypetitionerRepublicofthePhilippinesand,consequently,affirmedin tototheJune28,2004Order4oftheRegionalTrialCourt(RTC),Branch27, Gingoog City in Special Proceedings No. 230­2004grantingthePetitionforCorrectionofEntryofCertificateof LiveBirth filed by respondentDr.NormaS. LugsanayUy;whiletheassailedresolutiondeniedpetitioner’smotionforreconsideration.

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 forCorrection of Entry in her Certificate of Live Birth.5

Impleaded as respondent is the Local Civil Registrar ofGingoogCity.SheallegedthatshewasbornonFebruary8,1952andistheillegitimatedaughterofSyTonandSoteraLugsanay.6 Her Certificate of Live Birth7 shows that herfullnameis“AnitaSy”wheninfactsheisallegedlyknownto her family and friends as “Norma S. Lugsanay.” Shefurther claimed that her school records, ProfessionalRegulation Commission (PRC) Board of MedicineCertificate,8 and passport9 bear the name “Norma S.Lugsanay.”Shealsoallegedthatsheisanillegitimatechildconsideringthatherparentswerenevermarried,soshehadto followthesurnameofhermother.10Shealsocontendedthatshe isaFilipinocitizenandnotChinese,andallhersiblingsbearthesurnameLugsanayandareallFilipinos.11

Respondent allegedly filed earlier a petition forcorrection of entries with the Office of the Local CivilRegistrar of Gingoog City to effect the corrections on hername and citizenship which was supposedly granted.12

However, the National Statistics Office (NSO) records didnotbearsuchchanges.Hence,thepetitionbeforetheRTC.

OnMay13,2004,theRTCissuedanOrder13findingthepetitiontobesufficient in formandsubstanceandsettingthecaseforhearing,withthedirectivethatthesaidOrderbe published in a newspaper of general circulation in theCity of Gingoog and the Province ofMisamis Oriental atleastoncea

_______________

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 ofrespondent,andthattheorderandpetitionbefurnishedtheOffice of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the CityProsecutor’s Office for their information and guidance.14

PursuanttotheRTCOrder,respondentcompliedwiththepublicationrequirement.

OnJune28,2004,theRTCissuedanOrderinfavorofrespondent,thedispositiveportionofwhichreads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is

herebyGRANTED.THECITYCIVILREGISTRAROFGINGOOG

CITY,oranypersonacting inhisbehalf isdirectedandordered

toeffectthecorrectionorchangeoftheentriesintheCertificate

of Live Birth of petitioner’s name and citizenship so that the

entrieswouldbe:

a) Astopetitioner’sname:

FirstName:NORMA

MiddleName:SY

LastName:LUGSANAY

b)Astopetitioner’snationality/citizenship:FILIPINO

SOORDERED.15

The RTC concluded that respondent’s petition wouldneither prejudice the government nor any third party. Italsoheldthatthenames“NormaSyLugsanay”and“AnitaSy” refer to oneand the sameperson, especially since theLocal Civil Registrar of Gingoog City has effected thecorrection. Considering that respondent has continuouslyused and has been known since childhood as “Norma SyLugsanay”andasaFilipinocitizen, theRTCgrantedthepetitiontoavoidconfusion.16

_______________

14Id.

15Id.,atpp.28­29.

16Id.,atpp.27­28.

430

430 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED

Republic vs. Uy

OnFebruary18,2011,theCAaffirmedintototheRTCOrder. The CA held that respondent’s failure to impleadotherindispensablepartieswascureduponthepublicationoftheOrdersettingthecaseforhearinginanewspaperofgeneral circulation for three (3) consecutiveweeks andbyservingacopyofthenoticetotheLocalCivilRegistrar,theOSGand theCityProsecutor’sOffice.17As towhether thepetition is a collateral attack on respondent’s filiation, theCA ruled in favor of respondent, considering that herparentswerenotlegallymarriedandthathersiblings’birthcertificatesuniformlystatethattheirsurnameisLugsanayand their citizenship is Filipino.18 Petitioner’s motion forreconsiderationwasdenied inaResolutiondatedJuly27,2011.

Hence, thepresentpetitiononthesolegroundthat thepetition is dismissible for failure to implead indispensableparties.

CancellationorcorrectionofentriesinthecivilregistryisgovernedbyRule108oftheRulesofCourt,towit:

SEC. 1. Who may file petition.―Anypersoninterestedinanyact, event, orderordecree concerning the civil statusofpersonswhichhasbeenrecordedinthecivilregister,mayfilea verified petition for the cancellation or correction of anyentry relating thereto, with the Regional Trial Court of theprovincewherethecorrespondingcivilregistryislocated.

SEC. 2. Entries subject to cancellation orcorrection.―Upon good and valid grounds, the followingentries inthecivilregistermaybecancelledorcorrected: (a)births; (b) marriages; (c) deaths; (d) legal separations; (e)judgments of annulments of marriage; (f) judgmentsdeclaring marriages void from the beginning; (g)legitimations; (h) adoptions; (i) acknowledgments of naturalchildren; (j) naturalization; (k) election, loss or recovery ofcitizenship;(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 correctionof an entry in the civil register is sought, the civilregistrar and all persons who have or claim anyinterest which would be affected thereby shall bemade parties to the proceeding.

SEC.  4. Notice and Publication.―Upon the filingof the petition, the court shall, by an order, fix thetime and place for the hearing of the same, and causereasonable notice thereof to be given to the personsnamed in the petition. The court shall also cause theorder 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 theentry whose cancellation or correction is sought may,within fifteen (15) days from notice of the petition, orfrom the last date of publication of such notice, file hisopposition thereto.

SEC.  6. Expediting proceedings.―The court in whichthe proceeding is brought may make orders expediting theproceedings, and may also grant preliminary injunction forthe preservation of the rights of the parties pending suchproceedings.

SEC. 7.  Order.―After hearing, the court may eitherdismiss the petition or issue an order granting thecancellationorcorrectionprayedfor.Ineithercase,acertifiedcopyofthe judgmentshallbeserveduponthecivilregistrarconcernedwhoshallannotatethesameinhisrecord.19

Inthiscase,respondentsoughtthecorrectionofentriesinherbirthcertificate,particularlythosepertainingtoherfirst name, surname and citizenship. She sought thecorrection

_______________

19Emphasissupplied.

432

432 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED

Republic vs. Uy

allegedlytoreflectthenamewhichshehasbeenknownforsincechildhood, includingher legaldocumentssuchaspassport and school andprofessional records.She likewisereliedonthebirthcertificatesofherfullbloodsiblingswhobear the surname “Lugsanay” instead of “Sy” andcitizenshipof“Filipino” insteadof“Chinese.”Thechanges,however, are obviouslynotmere clerical as they touch onrespondent’s filiation and citizenship. In changing hersurnamefrom“Sy”(whichisthesurnameofherfather)to“Lugsanay” (which is the surname of hermother), she, ineffect, changes her status from legitimate to illegitimate;and in changingher citizenship fromChinese toFilipino,thesameaffectsherrightsandobligationsinthiscountry.Clearly,thechangesaresubstantial.

It has been settled in a number of cases starting withRepublic v. Valencia20thatevensubstantialerrorsinacivilregistry may be corrected and the true facts establishedprovidedthepartiesaggrievedbytheerroravailthemselvesof the appropriate adversary proceeding.21 ThepronouncementoftheCourtinthatcaseisilluminating:

It is undoubtedly true that if the subject matter of apetitionisnotforthecorrectionofclericalerrorsofaharmlessand innocuous nature, but one involving nationality orcitizenship, which is indisputably substantial as well ascontroverted, affirmative relief cannot be granted in aproceedingsummaryinnature.However,itisalsotruethata

right in lawmaybeenforcedandawrongmayberemediedaslongastheappropriate remedy is used.ThisCourtadherestotheprinciplethatevensubstantialerrorsinacivilregistrymaybecorrectedandthetrue factsestablishedprovidedtheparties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of theappropriateadversaryproceeding.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?”Black’s Law Dictionary defines “adversary proceeding” asfollows:

One having opposing parties; contested, asdistinguishedfromanex parteapplication,oneofwhichthepartyseekingreliefhasgivenlegalwarningtotheother party, and afforded the latter an opportunity tocontestit.Excludesanadoptionproceeding.22

In sustaining the RTC decision, the CA relied on theCourt’s conclusion in Republic v. Kho,23 Alba v. Court ofAppeals,24andBarco v. Court of Appeals,25thatthefailureto implead indispensable parties was cured by thepublication of the notice of hearing pursuant to theprovisionsofRule108oftheRulesofCourt.InRepublic v.Kho,26 petitioner therein appealed the RTC decisiongranting the petition for correction of entries despiterespondents’ failure to implead the minor’s mother as anindispensable party. The Court, however, did not strictlyapply theprovisionsofRule108,because itopinedthat itwashighlyimprobablethatthemotherwasunawareoftheproceedings to correct the entries in her children’s birthcertificatesespeciallysincethenotices,ordersanddecisionofthetrialcourtwereallsenttotheresidenceshesharedwiththem.27

InAlba v. Court of Appeals,28 theCourt found nothingwrongwith the trial court’s decision granting thepetitionfor correction of entries filed by respondent although theproceedingswasnotactuallyknownbypetitioner. In thatcase,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

tioner’smotherandguardianwasimpleadedinthepetitionforcorrectionofentries,andnoticesweresenttoheraddressappearing in the subject birth certificate. However, thenotice was returned unserved, because apparently she nolongerlivedthere.Thus,whensheallegedlylearnedofthegranting of the petition, she sought the annulment ofjudgment which the Court denied. Considering that thepetitionforcorrectionofentriesisaproceedingin rem,theCourtheldthatacquisitionofjurisdictionoverthepersonofthepetitioneris,therefore,notrequiredandtheabsenceofpersonal servicewas cured by the trial court’s compliancewithRule108whichrequiresnoticebypublication.29

InBarco v. Court of Appeals,30 theCourtaddressedthequestion of whether the court acquired jurisdiction overpetitionerandallotherindispensablepartiestothepetitionforcorrectionofentriesdespitethefailuretoimpleadtheminsaid case.While recognizing thatpetitionerwas indeedanindispensableparty,thefailuretoimpleadherwascuredby compliance with Section 4 of Rule 108 which requiresnotice by publication. In so ruling, the Court pointed outthat the petitioner in a petition for correction cannot bepresumedtobeawareofallthepartieswhoseinterestsmaybeaffectedbythegrantingofapetition.Itemphasizedthatthepetitionerthereinexertedearnestefforttocomplywiththe provisions of Rule 108. Thus, the publication of thenoticeofhearingwasconsideredtohavecuredthefailuretoimpleadindispensableparties.

In this case, it was only the Local Civil Registrar ofGingoog City who was impleaded as respondent in thepetitionbelow.This,notwithstanding,theRTCgrantedherpetition 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

ThisisnotthefirsttimethattheCourtisconfrontedwiththe issue involved in this case.Aside fromKho,Alba andBarco, the Court has addressed the same in Republic v.Coseteng­Magpayo,31 Ceruila v. Delantar,32 and Labayo­Rowe v. Republic.33

In Republic v. Coseteng­Magpayo,34 claiming that hisparentswereneverlegallymarried,respondentthereinfileda petition to change his name from “Julian EdwardEmerson CosetengMagpayo,” the name appearing in hisbirthcertificate to “JulianEdwardEmersonMarquezLimCoseteng.”Thenotice setting thepetition forhearingwas

published and there being no opposition thereto, the trialcourt issued an order of general default and eventuallygrantedrespondent’spetitiondeletingtheentryonthedateand place of marriage of parties; correcting his surnamefrom “Magpayo” to “Coseteng”; deleting the entry“Coseteng”formiddlename;anddeletingtheentry“FulvioMiranda Magpayo, Jr.” in the space for his father. TheRepublicofthePhilippines,throughtheOSG,assailedtheRTCdecisiononthegroundsthatthecorrectionsmadeonrespondent’sbirthcertificatehadtheeffectofchangingthecivilstatusfromlegitimatetoillegitimateandmustonlybeeffectedthroughanappropriateadversaryproceeding.TheCourtnullifiedtheRTCdecisionforrespondent’sfailuretocomplystrictlywiththeprocedurelaiddowninRule108oftheRulesofCourt.Asidefromthewrongremedyavailedofby respondent as he filed a petition for Change of NameunderRule103oftheRulesofCourt,assumingthathefiledapetitionunderRule108whichistheappropriateremedy,the petition still failed because of improper venue andfailuretoimpleadtheCivilRegistrarofMakatiCityandallaffectedpartiesasrespondentsinthecase.

_______________

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,35theCeruilasfiledapetitionforthe cancellation and annulment of the birth certificate ofrespondent on the ground that the samewasmade as aninstrumentofthecrimeofsimulationofbirthand,therefore,invalid and spurious, and it falsified all material entriestherein. The RTC issued an order setting the case forhearing with a directive that the same be published andthat any person who is interested in the petition mayinterpose his comment or opposition on or before thescheduledhearing.SummonswaslikewisesenttotheCivilRegisterofManila.Afterwhich,thetrialcourtgrantedthepetition and nullified respondent’s birth certificate. Fewmonthsafter,respondentfiledapetitionfortheannulmentof judgment claiming that sheandherguardianwerenotnotifiedofthepetitionandthetrialcourt’sdecision,hence,thelatterwasissuedwithoutjurisdictionandinviolationofherrighttodueprocess.TheCourtannulledthetrialcourt’sdecisionforfailuretocomplywiththerequirementsofRule108, especially the non­impleading of respondent herselfwhosebirthcertificatewasnullified.

InLabayo­Rowe v. Republic,36 petitioner filedapetitionfor the correction of entries in thebirth certificates ofherchildren, specifically to change her name fromBeatriz V.Labayu/Beatriz Labayo to Emperatriz Labayo, her civilstatusfrom“married”to“single,”andthedateandplaceof

marriage from “1953­Bulan” to “Nomarriage.” TheCourtmodifiedthetrialcourt’sdecisionbynullifyingtheportionthereofwhichdirectsthechangeofpetitioner’scivilstatusaswellasthefiliationofherchild,becauseitwastheOSGonlythatwasmaderespondentandtheproceedingstakenwassummaryinnaturewhichisshortofwhatisrequiredincaseswheresubstantialalterationsaresought.

Respondent’sbirthcertificateshowsthatherfullnameisAnita Sy, that she is a Chinese citizen and a legitimatechild

_______________

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 andsurname,herstatusfrom“legitimate”to“illegitimate”andher citizenship from “Chinese” to “Filipino.” Thus,respondentshouldhaveimpleadedandnotifiednotonlytheLocalCivilRegistrarbutalsoherparentsand siblingsasthe persons who have interest and are affected by thechangesorcorrectionsrespondentwantedtomake.

The fact that the notice of hearingwas published in anewspaper of general circulation and notice thereof wasserved upon the State will not change the nature of theproceedingstaken.37AreadingofSections4and5,Rule108oftheRulesofCourtshowsthattheRulesmandatetwosetsofnoticestodifferentpotentialoppositors:onegiventothepersonsnamed in thepetitionandanother given to otherpersonswhoarenotnamedinthepetitionbutnonethelessmaybeconsideredinterestedoraffectedparties.38Summonsmust,therefore,beservednotforthepurposeofvestingthecourtswithjurisdictionbuttocomplywiththerequirementsoffairplayanddueprocesstoaffordthepersonconcernedtheopportunitytoprotecthisinterestifhesochooses.39

WhiletheremaybecaseswheretheCourtheldthatthefailure to implead and notify the affected or interestedparties may be cured by the publication of the notice ofhearing, earnest efforts were made by petitioners inbringing to court all possible interested parties.40 Suchfailure was likewise excused where the interested partiesthemselves initiated the corrections proceedings;41 whenthereisnoactualorpresump­

_______________

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;42orwhenapartyisinadvertentlyleftout.43

It is clear from the foregoing discussion that when apetitionforcancellationorcorrectionofanentryinthecivilregister involves substantial and controversial alterations,including those on citizenship, legitimacy of paternity orfiliation,orlegitimacyofmarriage,astrictcompliancewiththe requirements of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court ismandated.44 If the entries in the civil register could becorrected or changed throughmere summary proceedingsandnotthroughappropriateactionwhereinallpartieswhomaybeaffectedby theentriesarenotifiedorrepresented,thedoor to fraudor othermischiefwouldbe set open, theconsequence of which might be detrimental and farreaching.45

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition isherebyGRANTED. The Court of Appeals Decision datedFebruary18,2011andResolutiondatedJuly27,20011inCA­G.R. CV No. 00238­MIN, are SET ASIDE.Consequently, the June 28, 2004 Order of the RegionalTrialCourt,Branch27,GingoogCity,inSpl.Proc.No.230­2004 granting the Petition for Correction of Entry ofCertificateofLiveBirth filedbyrespondentDr.NormaS.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 entryunderRule108(CancellationorCorrectionofEntriesintheOriginal Registry), the trial court has no jurisdiction tonullify marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation.(Braza vs. City Civil Registrar of Himamaylan City, NegrosOccidental,607SCRA638[2009])

In petitions for change of name, a person avails of aremedytoalterthe“designationbywhichheisknownandcalled in the community in which he lives and is bestknown”;Judicialpermission fora changeofnameaims topreventfraudandtoensurearecordofthechangebyvirtue

of a court decree. (Republic vs. Mercadera, 637 SCRA 654[2010])

――o0o――

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