Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. No. 130277 -

G.R. No. 130277 - MA. LOURDES BARRIENTOS ELEOSIDA, FOR AND IN BEHALF OF HER MINOR CHILD, CHARLES CHRISTIAN ELEOSIDA, VS. LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF QUEZON CITY, AND CARLOS VILLENA BORBON.

Cited Laws

RA 1RA 657RA 25RA 462RA 634RA 681RA 366RA 12RA 550
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, for LACK OF MERIT, the petition is now MOTU PROPIO (sic) dismissed.” [6] Petitioner filed the instant petition for review raising the issue of whether corrections of entries in the certificate of live birth pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Code, in relation to Rule 108 of the Rules of Court may be allowed even if the errors to be corrected are substantial and not merely clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature.

Decision

Ruling

WHEREFORE, for LACK OF MERIT, the petition is now MOTU PROPIO (sic) dismissed. [6] Petitioner filed the instant petition for review raising the issue of whether corrections of entries in the certificate of live birth pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Code, in relation to Rule 108 of the Rules of Court may be allowed even if the errors to be corrected are substantial and not merely clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature. [7] The Court required the respondents to comment on the petition. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Manifestation in Lieu of Comment. The OSG submitted that even substantial errors in the civil registry may be corrected provided that the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriate adversary proceeding. Thus it argued that even if the petition seeks the correction and eventual change in the civil status of Charles Christian, the same can be ordered by the court as long as all the parties who may be affected by the entries are notified and represented. [8] Respondent Carlos Borbon, on the other hand, failed to submit his comment on the petition despite several notices from this Court. Hence, on January 24, 2001, the Court dispensed with the filing of respondent Borbon's comment and gave due course to the petition. [9] We find merit in the petition. Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court provides the procedure for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry. The proceedings under said rule may either be summary or adversary in nature. If the correction sought to be made in the civil register is clerical, then the procedure to be adopted is summary. If the rectification affects the civil status, citizenship or nationality of a party, it is deemed substantial, and the procedure to be adopted is adversary. [10] This is our ruling in Republic vs. Valencia [11] where we held that even substantial errors in a civil registry may be corrected and the true facts established under Rule 108 provided the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriate adversary proceeding. An appropriate adversary suit or proceeding is one where the trial court has conducted proceedings where all relevant facts have been fully and properly developed, where opposing counsel have been given opportunity to demolish the opposite party's case, and where the evidence has been thoroughly weighed and considered. The Court further laid down the procedural requirements to make the proceedings under Rule 108 adversary, thus: The pertinent sections of Rule 108 provide: SEC. 3. Parties. --When cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil registrar and all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby shall be made parties to the proceeding. SEC. 4. Notice and publication. --Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall, by an order, fix the time and place for the hearing of the same, and cause reasonable notice thereof t