G.R. No. L-18669 - IN RE: Ty Bio Giao vs. Republic

On January 18, 1961, Ty Bio Giao filed a verified petition with the lower court seeking a change of name.
He alleged that he is of legal age, a Chinese national, and has resided bona fide in Ormoc City, Leyte, Philippines for over three years.
The petitioner contended that his present name, “Ty Bio Giao” (a derivative of his Chinese ancestral name), carries in the Visayan dialect a meaning or connotation that leads to derisive laughter and abusive comments.
He claimed that this negative interpretation has resulted in personal embarrassment and has adversely affected his social and business dealings.
He further sought to change his name to “Vicente Ty,” a name given to him by his parents at the time of his baptism, reportedly in the year 1927 at the Metropolitan Cathedral of Cebu City, a name with which he was commonly known in his community.
The petitioner emphasized that his motivation for the change was not to defraud any person.

Following the filing of the petition, the proper publication of the petition and notice to the Solicitor General took place.
An opposition was subsequently filed by the City Attorney of Ormoc City, representing the former National Government.
The lower court, after due hearing, granted the petitioner’s request for a change of name.
The State appealed the decision, prompting the present review.

The petitioner failed to produce sufficient or reliable evidence to prove that his name “Ty Bio Giao” evoked inordinate derisive laughter or abusive comments causing him embarrassment.
No concrete evidence was introduced to substantiate the claim regarding the derogatory meaning or the extent of social handicap in his business dealings.
With respect to his claim that he was baptized in 1927 and given the name “Vicente Ty”, the petitioner presented merely a certificate from his parish priest acknowledging the unavailability of church records due to wartime destruction.
The certificate did not amount to reliable proof of his baptism or of the name originally given to him.
It was admitted by the petitioner that during his residence in the Philippines he had used several other names without legal authority, raising concerns about potential confusion regarding his true identity if the name change were allowed.

Whether the petitioner has established, by clear and convincing evidence, that his current name “Ty Bio Giao” carries a derogatory meaning in the Visayan dialect that causes him embarrassment and social or business handicap.

The necessity and justification for a change of name hinges on the presentation of reliable evidence demonstrating the harmful effects of the current name.

Whether the evidence offered is sufficient to establish the facts concerning his baptism and the originally given name “Vicente Ty.”

The petitioner’s reliance on a certificate of non-availability of church records raises questions about the veracity and reliability of his claim.

Whether the potential for confusion resulting from admitting a change of name, given that the petitioner has used various names without legal authority during his residence, outweighs the petitioner’s reasons.

The State has a vested interest in maintaining consistent personal identification for social and legal purposes.

Whether the change of name is being sought for a proper and reasonable cause as required under Section 5, Rule 103 of the Rules of Court and established jurisprudence.

The case requires a demonstration that such a change will not lead to confusion or serve any unlawful or trivial purpose.