GR L 18669; (November, 1965) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-18669 November 29, 1965
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHANGE OF NAME OF TY BIO GIAO, TY BIO GIAO, petitioner-appellee, vs. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Petitioner-appellee Ty Bio Giao, a Chinese national and a bona fide resident of Ormoc City, Leyte, filed a verified petition for a change of name. He alleged that his name “Ty Bio Giao,” a derivative of his Chinese ancestral name, carries in the Visayan dialect a meaning and connotation that evokes derisive laughter and abusive comments, causing him embarrassment and serving as a handicap in his social and business dealings. He sought to change his name to “Vicente Ty,” which he claimed was the name given to him by his parents at his baptism in 1927 at the Metropolitan Cathedral of Cebu City and by which he is commonly known in the community. He asserted that the change was not for the purpose of defrauding any person. After publication and notice, the City Attorney of Ormoc City, representing the Republic of the Philippines, opposed the petition. The lower court granted the petition, prompting the State’s appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the lower court erred in granting the petition for change of name.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and dismissed the petition. The Court held that a change of name may be authorized only for proper and reasonable cause under Section 5, Rule 103 of the Rules of Court. Petitioner failed to prove the truth of his allegations. He did not present sufficient evidence to establish that his name evokes derisive laughter or is a handicap in his business dealings, nor did he provide reliable evidence of his baptism and the name “Vicente Ty,” as the presented certificate only attested to the non-availability of church records. Most importantly, the Court noted petitioner’s admission that he had used several names during his residence in the Philippines without legal authority, creating a possibility of confusion if the change were allowed. The State has an interest in the names of individuals for identification, and changes should not be permitted for trivial reasons or without clear proof of necessity and the absence of any unlawful purpose. The petition was dismissed, with costs.