Title
Republic vs. Cagandahan
Case
G.R. No. 166676
Decision Date
Sep 12, 2008
Jennifer Cagandahan, diagnosed with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, sought legal recognition as male. The Supreme Court affirmed her petition, ruling that intersex individuals' self-identification, supported by medical evidence, justifies gender and name changes in birth certificates.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 225899)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Petition and allegations
    • On December 11, 2003, Jennifer B. Cagandahan filed a Petition for Correction of Entries in her birth certificate before the RTC of Siniloan, Laguna, alleging she was born January 13, 1981 and registered as female.
    • She claimed a diagnosis of Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH), resulting in both male and female characteristics, with clitoral hypertrophy, underdeveloped ovaries and lack of breast and menstrual development by age 13, and asserted she identifies and functions as male.
  • Procedural steps and evidence
    • The petition was published for three successive weeks and served upon the Solicitor General’s office; the Local Civil Registrar was furnished copies but not impleaded.
    • Respondent presented medical testimony and a certificate from Dr. Michael Sionzon (UP–PGH Psychiatry) confirming permanent CAH, excess androgen production, ambiguous genitalia, absence of menstruation, and recommending gender change.
  • RTC decision
    • In its January 12, 2005 Decision, the RTC granted the petition, ordering the birth certificate amended: name changed from “Jennifer” to “Jeff” and gender from “female” to “male.”
    • The RTC further directed correction of school records, voter registry, baptismal certificate, and other pertinent documents to conform with the amended entries.

Issues:

  • Compliance with procedural rules
    • Whether the petition complied with the residency requirement under Rule 103, Sec. 2(b).
    • Whether the petition improperly failed to implead the Local Civil Registrar as an indispensable party under Rule 108, Sec. 3.
  • Scope of Rule 108 and effect of CAH
    • Whether correction under Rule 108 may include change of “sex” or “gender” in a birth certificate.
    • Whether respondent’s medical condition (CAH) legally qualifies her as “male” for purposes of civil registry entry.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.