MANILA, Philippines – Within the case of Within the Matter of Petition for Cancellation of Certificates of Stay Beginning of Yuhares Juan Barcelote Tinitigan and Avee Kuynna Noelle Barcelote Tinitigan vs. Republic of the Philippines, Ricky Tinitigan, et al. (GR 222095, August 7, 2017)
Jonna Barcelote had two youngsters born out of wedlock whom she named Yohan Grace Barcelote and Joshua Miguel Barcelote. She didn’t instantly register the births of her youngsters to keep away from humiliation, ridicule and potential felony expenses.
READ: Goodwill in Enterprise Transfers: Capital or Bizarre Asset?
The daddy was a married man, named Ricky Tinitigan, whom she misplaced contact with.
It was when her eldest baby wanted a beginning certificates for admission to education when she lastly determined to register the births of her youngsters.
However this was denied as a result of she had been knowledgeable by the Nationwide Statistics Workplace (NSO) – now Philippine Statistics Authority – that there have been already two beginning certificates along with her title as mom and the years of beginning of the youngsters.
The registered beginning certificates had been for Avee Kyna Noelle Barcelote Tinitigan and Yuhares Jan Barcelote Tinitigan. She realized these had been registered by their father, Ricky Tinitigan.
In consequence, she filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court docket (RTC) to cancel the beginning certificates registered by the daddy on grounds that they’d been made with out her information, participation and contained faulty entries.
The RTC cancelled the beginning certificates as a result of they had been registered unilaterally by Tinitigan with out the information and signature of Barcelote in violation of Part 5, Act No. 3753.
Nevertheless, this was reversed by the Court docket of Appeals (CA), which dominated that the registrations of the youngsters’s births had been legitimate as they didn’t require the consent of the mom.
Additional, the CA dominated that illegitimate youngsters can legally use the surname of their father pursuant to Republic Act No. 9255 when they’re expressly acknowledged by their father, which on this case was made by the document of beginning showing within the civil register.
The Supreme Court docket, nevertheless, reversed the CA and upheld the choice of the RTC and cancelled the beginning certificates of the youngsters.
It’s not disputed that the youngsters are illegitimate as they had been conceived and born exterior a sound marriage. (Artwork. 165, Household Code)
Previous to its modification, Artwork. 176 of the Household Code already supplied that illegitimate youngsters shall use the surname and shall be beneath the parental authority of their mom.
This was amended upon the effectivity of Republic Act No. 925, which added that illegitimate youngsters might use the surname of their father if their filiation has been expressly acknowledged by their father.
The Supreme Court docket declared that whereas RA 9255 permits illegitimate youngsters to make use of the surname of their father if they’ve been expressly acknowledged, the beginning certificates as registered by Tinitigan weren’t the specific recognition beneath the legislation as they weren’t registered in accordance with the legislation.
As such, the surnames indicated on the beginning certificates of the youngsters, Tinitigan, had been faulty because the certificates ought to mirror the surname of their mom — Barcelote.
Act No. 3753, or the Civil Registry Regulation, supplies that the declaration of the doctor or midwife in attendance on the beginning or, in default thereof, the declaration of both mother or father of the new child baby, shall be ample for the registration of a beginning within the civil register.
Nevertheless, within the case of illegitimate youngsters, the fourth paragraph of Part 5 of Act No. 3753 supplies that the beginning certificates shall be signed and sworn to collectively by the dad and mom of the toddler or solely the mom if the daddy refuses.
The Supreme Court docket defined that contemplating the wording of the second paragraph of Part 5 of Act No. 3753, it was obligatory in all circumstances that the mom of an illegitimate baby should signal the beginning certificates, no matter whether or not the daddy acknowledges the kid or not.
The one legally identified mother or father of an illegitimate baby, by the very fact of illegitimacy, is the mom of the kid who conclusively carries the blood of the mom. Thus, this provision ensures that people are usually not falsely named as dad and mom.
The mom should signal and comply with the knowledge entered within the beginning certificates as a result of she is given by legislation parental authority and custody over the illegitimate baby.
Contemplating that it seems on the face of the beginning certificates of the youngsters that the mom didn’t signal the paperwork, the native civil registrar had no authority to register the topic beginning certificates.
Underneath the IRR of Act No. 3753, the civil registrar shall see to it that the Certificates of Stay Beginning offered for registration is correctly and fully crammed up, and the entries are right.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court docket granted the appliance of Jonna Barcelote to cancel the beginning certificates registered by Ricky Tinitigan, the daddy of the youngsters, so that the beginning certificates containing the proper info could also be registered.
Your subscription couldn’t be saved. Please attempt once more.
Your subscription has been profitable.
(The writer, Atty. John Philip C. Siao, is a practising lawyer and founding Companion of Tiongco Siao Bello & Associates Regulation Places of work, an Arbitrator of the Development Trade Arbitration Fee of the Philippines, and teaches legislation on the De La Salle College Tañada-Diokno College of Regulation. He could also be contacted at [email protected]. The views expressed on this article belong to the writer alone.)
