Title
IN RE: Yuhares Jan Barcelote Tinitigan
Case
G.R. No. 222095
Decision Date
Aug 7, 2017
Barcelote sought cancellation of birth certificates registered by Tinitigan for their illegitimate children, citing lack of consent and legal violations. SC ruled in her favor, upholding mother's rights and children's best interests.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 222095)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Births and Initial Registrations
    • On June 24, 2008, petitioner Jonna Karla B. Barcelote bore an illegitimate child, Yohan Grace Barcelote, with respondent Ricky O. Tinitigan at a relative’s residence in Sibulan, Santa Cruz, Davao del Sur; unregistered at birth.
    • On August 24, 2011, Barcelote bore a second illegitimate child, Joshua Miguel Barcelote, with Tinitigan; also unregistered to avoid stigma and criminal exposure.
  • Subsequent Late Registration and Discovery of Duplicate Certificates
    • Barcelote filed for late registration of both births in Santa Cruz; certificates issued as Registry Nos. 2012-1344 (Yohan Grace) and 2012-1335 (Joshua Miguel).
    • Upon submission to the NSO, Barcelote discovered two earlier certificates filed by Tinitigan in Davao City:
      • Registry No. 2008-21709: Avee Kyna Noelle Barcelote Tinitigan (June 4, 2008)
      • Registry No. 2011-28329: Yuhares Jan Barcelote Tinitigan (August 14, 2011)
  • Proceedings Below
    • RTC (Feb. 28, 2013): Allowed ex parte evidence, found Tinitigan’s unilateral registrations void for lack of mother’s consent and wrong surname (Family Code art. 176), and ordered cancellation.
    • CA (Mar. 5, 2015; Dec. 3, 2015): Reversed RTC, held registrations valid under Act No. 3753, RA 9255 permitted use of father’s surname upon recognition, and dismissed petition for lack of merit.

Issues:

  • Whether the CA erred in not cancelling the certificates of live birth registered by Tinitigan, on grounds that:
    • Under the Family Code, illegitimate children must use the mother’s surname.
    • The certificates contain entries not reflecting true personal circumstances.
    • Act No. 3753 requires mother’s signature on an illegitimate child’s birth certificate.
    • Cancellation is in the best interest and welfare of the children.
  • Whether the CA should have treated the petition for cancellation as a petition for correction under Rule 108, given compliance with procedural requirements.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.