Case Digest (G.R. No. 140982)
Facts:
On July 25, 1960, Dy Kim Liong (the petitioner) filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Manila seeking to correct the birth certificate of his son, Raynaldo Chan. The petition requested that his son’s name be changed to Raynaldo Dy, and that the name of the father listed as Jose Chan be replaced with Dy Kim Liong. On December 29, 1960, the Republic of the Philippines (the respondent) opposed the petition by moving to dismiss it on the grounds that it failed to state a cause of action and that the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. Instead of addressing the motion to dismiss, the court proceeded to trial. On May 21, 1961, the court issued a decision denying the petition but ordered the civil registrar to accept for filing a certified true copy of a record from the Bureau of Immigration indicating Dy Kim Liong's name. The government appealed this specific portion of the decision after a motion for reconsideration was denied, arguing that the r
Case Digest (G.R. No. 140982)
Facts:
On July 25, 1960, Dy Kim Liong, acting as petitioner and appellee, filed a petition before the Court of First Instance of Manila asking for the correction of his son Raynaldo Chan’s birth certificate. Specifically, he sought to change the name “Raynaldo Chan” to “Raynaldo Dy” and to alter the name of the recorded father from Jose Chan to Dy Kim Liong. The petition was based on an alleged mistake in the civil registry document.While the main petition was pending, on December 29, 1960, the government moved to dismiss the petition for stating no cause of action and for lack of jurisdiction by the court a quo to grant the relief. Nonetheless, the court proceeded to try the case and on May 21, 1961, rendered a decision denying the main petition. However, the decision also included an additional relief directing the local civil registrar of Manila to register, in the birth certificate of Raynaldo, a certified true copy of the record of the Bureau of Immigration that showed petitioner’s name as Dy Kim Liong.
Subsequently, the government moved to reconsider this additional order which mandated the registration and attachment of the Bureau of Immigration document. When the motion was denied by the court a quo, the government elevated the issue by appealing the case.
Issues:
- Whether the local civil registrar was authorized, under Sections 10, 11, and 12 of Civil Register Act No. 3753, to register and attach the certified true copy of the Bureau of Immigration record to Raynaldo’s birth certificate.
- Whether the document in question could be classified as one of the “registrable certificates and documents” as required by the statute, which expressly covers matters such as adoptions, name changes, naturalizations, legitimation, and acknowledgments that emanate from proper court proceedings.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)