G.R. No. 215370 , November 9, 2021
RICHELLE BUSQUE ORDOÑA, PETITIONER, VS. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF PASIG CITY AND ALLAN D. FULGUERAS, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Petitioner Richelle Busque Ordoña, married to Ariel Libut, separated from him in 2008 after discovering his infidelity but did not annul the marriage. While working abroad, she had a relationship with Allan D. Fulgueras, resulting in the birth of Alrich Paul Ordoña Fulgueras on January 26, 2010. In Alrich Paul’s Certificate of Live Birth, Allan was named as the father, and an Affidavit of Acknowledgment/Admission of Paternity was attached. Petitioner filed a petition under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City, seeking to: (1) change Alrich Paul’s surname from “Fulgueras” to “Ordoña,” and (2) delete the paternal entries (Items 13-17) in the birth certificate. She alleged Allan could not have signed the acknowledgment affidavit as he was abroad during the birth. The RTC denied the petition, ruling the affidavit was a public instrument establishing Allan’s recognition, allowing the child to use his surname under Article 176 of the Family Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 9255 , and that deletion would deprive the child of a father and affect his legitime. The Court of Appeals affirmed but on different grounds, holding that Alrich Paul is presumed legitimate as he was born during petitioner’s marriage to Ariel, and legitimacy can only be impugned by the husband or his heirs in exceptional cases, not via a Rule 108 petition. The CA found the RTC erred in declaring the child illegitimate based solely on the mother’s admission.

ISSUE

Whether a petition for correction of entries under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court is the proper remedy to change the surname of a child from the father’s surname to the mother’s surname and to delete the father’s information in the certificate of live birth on the ground of lack of the father’s acknowledgment.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ Decision. The Court held that a Rule 108 petition is not the proper remedy to effect the changes sought, as they constitute substantial alterations that would affect the child’s filiation and legitimacy. The entries in the certificate of live birth—specifically the father’s name and the child’s surname—are not mere clerical errors but involve the child’s status and affiliation. The attached Affidavit of Acknowledgment is a public document that gives rise to the presumption that Allan expressly recognized the child as his illegitimate child, pursuant to Article 176 of the Family Code, as amended. This recognition can only be challenged in a direct action specifically filed for that purpose, such as an action for impugnation or for the nullity of recognition under Article 171 of the Family Code, not in a summary proceeding for correction of entries. Furthermore, the child, Alrich Paul, is presumed legitimate under Article 164 of the Family Code as he was born during the marriage of petitioner to Ariel. This presumption of legitimacy can only be impugned in a direct suit filed by the husband (Ariel) or, in exceptional cases, his heirs. Petitioner, as the mother, has no legal personality to impugn the child’s legitimacy. Therefore, the desired corrections, which would effectively negate the father’s recognition and alter the child’s status, cannot be granted in a Rule 108 proceeding.