Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Republic vs. Hon. Jose R. Hernandez

    Uploaded by

    merren bloom
    84 views3 pages
    This case involved a petition filed by adoptive parents that sought both the adoption of a minor child and a change of the child's first name. The Supreme Court ruled (1) that an adoption decree does not grant the right to change an adoptee's first name, which must remain as recorded in the civil registry, and (2) that a petition for adoption and change of name do not meet the criteria for joinder under the Rules of Court as they do not present common questions of fact or law. The Court therefore denied the request to change the child's first name but allowed the adoption to proceed.

    Original Description:

    Civil case

    Original Title

    Republic vs. Hon. Jose R. Hernandez,

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involved a petition filed by adoptive parents that sought both the adoption of a minor child and a change of the child's first name. The Supreme Court ruled (1) that an adoption decree does not grant the right to change an adoptee's first name, which must remain as recorded in the civil registry, and (2) that a petition for adoption and change of name do not meet the criteria for joinder under the Rules of Court as they do not present common questions of fact or law. The Court therefore denied the request to change the child's first name but allowed the adoption to proceed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    84 views3 pages

    Republic vs. Hon. Jose R. Hernandez

    Uploaded by

    merren bloom
    This case involved a petition filed by adoptive parents that sought both the adoption of a minor child and a change of the child's first name. The Supreme Court ruled (1) that an adoption decree does not grant the right to change an adoptee's first name, which must remain as recorded in the civil registry, and (2) that a petition for adoption and change of name do not meet the criteria for joinder under the Rules of Court as they do not present common questions of fact or law. The Court therefore denied the request to change the child's first name but allowed the adoption to proceed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    a.

    Doctrine:
    While it is true that there is no express prohibition against the joinder of a
    petition for adoption and for change of name, we do not believe that there
    is any relation between these two petitions, nor are they of the same nature
    or character, much less do they present any common question of fact or
    law, which conjointly would warrant their joinder. In short, these petitions
    do not rightly meet the underlying test of conceptual unity demanded to
    sanction their joinder under our Rules.
    While the right of a natural parent to name the child is recognized,
    guaranteed and protected under the law, the so-called right of an adoptive
    parent to re-name an adopted child by virtue or as a consequence of
    adoption, even for the most noble intentions and moving supplications, is
    unheard of in law and consequently cannot be favorably considered.

    b.Case title: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. HON.


    JOSE R. HERNANDEZ, in his capacity as Presiding Judge, Regional Trial
    Court, Branch 158, Pasig City and SPOUSES VAN MUNSON y NAVARRO
    and REGINA MUNSON y ANDRADE, respondents. G.R. No. 117209  
    (REGALADO, J.:)          February 9, 1996

    c. Facts: Private respondent spouses filed a petition to adopt Kevin Earl


    Bartolome Moran, a minor. Private respondents prayed in the same petition
    for the minor adoptee's first name to be changed to Aaron Joseph, the
    name by which he was baptized in accordance with religious practice and
    by which he has been addressed by his family and friends since 1993.
     
       The petitioner objected to the petition for adoption and the petitions for
    change of name being combined into a single proceeding, arguing that they
    should be treated and sought separately.

    The trial court ruled in favor of herein private respondents.


     

    d. Issue/s
    (1) whether or not the court a quo erred in granting the prayer for the
    change of the registered proper or given name of the minor adoptee
    embodied in the petition for adoption; and
    (2) whether the joinder of a petition for adoption and for change of
    name was proper

    e.Held:
    1) YES. The adoptee’s first name must not be changed.
     
    The law allows the adoptee to carry the surname of the adopter as a matter
    of right and obligation upon the issuance of the adoption decree. The
    adoptee's given or proper name, on the other hand, must remain the same
    as it was when he or she was first recorded in the civil registry.
    The establishment of an adoptive relationship does not grant the adopter
    the right to change the adoptee's first name. The automatic modification
    thereof, based solely on the adoption thus granted, is beyond the scope of
    an adoption decree.
     
    Changing a person's given or proper name as documented in the civil
    register constitutes a significant change in one's official or legal name and
    cannot be allowed without a judicial order.
     
    If a name change is desired, it can only be accomplished by filing and
    strictly adhering to the substantive and procedural provisions for a special
    proceeding for change of name under Rule 103 of the Rules of Court,
    where the sufficiency of the reasons or grounds for the change can be
    threshed out and accordingly decided.
     
    A petition for change of name being a proceeding in rem, strict compliance
    with all the requirements therefor is indispensable in order to vest the court
    with jurisdiction for its adjudication.
     
    (2)
    Although there is no explicit prohibition against the joinder of a petition for
    adoption and a petition for change of name, the court ruled that there is no
    relationship between these two petitions, nor are they of the same nature or
    character, much less raise any common issue of fact or law that would
    justify their joinder. According to the SC, said petitions do not rightly meet
    the underlying test of conceptual unity demanded to sanction their joinder
    under our Rules.
    WHEREFORE, on the foregoing premises, the assailed order of
    respondent judge is hereby MODIFIED. The legally adopted child of private
    respondents shall henceforth be officially known as Kevin Earl Munson y
    Andrade unless a change thereof is hereafter effected in accordance with
    law. In all other respects, the order is AFFIRMED.

    SO ORDERED.

    You might also like