GR L 27159; (September, 1969) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-27159 September 17, 1969
IN THE MATTER OF THE CORRECTION OF CERTAIN ENTRIES IN THE BIRTH RECORDS OF THE MINORS TERESITA CHAN, ALICIA CHAN, VIRGINIA CHAN and VICENTE CHAN. CHAN CHIN, petitioner-appellee, vs. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF MANILA, respondent-appellant.
FACTS
Petitioner Chan Chin sought from the Court of First Instance of Manila an order for the correction of entries in the birth records of four minors: Teresita, Alicia, Virginia, and Vicente. The corrections sought were substantial: for Teresita (recorded as Teresita Uy, daughter of Chi Uy and Juanita Go born in Amoy, Chinkang), petitioner wanted to change the name to Teresita Chan, father to Chan Chin, mother to Juanita Co, and birthplace to Manila. For Alicia (recorded as Alicia Ching, daughter of Chang Ching and Juanita Go born in Emoy, China), the changes sought were to Alicia Chan, father to Chan Chin, mother to Juanita Co, and birthplace to Amoy. For Virginia (recorded as Virginia Chan, daughter of Chin Chan born in Manila), the changes were to list the father as Chan Chin born in Amoy, China. For Vicente (recorded as Vicente Chan, son of Chan Ching), the change was to list the father as Chan Chin. The trial court granted the petition. The Government, through the Local Civil Registrar, appealed.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly granted the petition for the correction of the entries in the civil registry under Article 412 of the Civil Code, considering the nature of the changes sought.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court reversed the order of the trial court and dismissed the petition.
The Court held that the summary proceeding under Article 412 of the Civil Code is limited to the correction of innocuous or clerical errors, such as misspellings, that are visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding. The changes sought by petitioner were substantial, affecting the status, citizenship, and identity of the persons involved. For instance, changing “Chi Uy” to “Chan Chin” and “Juanita Go” to “Juanita Co” involves altering the identity of the parents and the child’s status. The record contained no evidence to establish that the persons named in the birth records were the same persons petitioner claimed them to be (e.g., that Chi Uy is Chan Chin). The petitioner’s claim that errors were due to his wife’s difficulty of speech after childbirth presented a factual issue not apparent from the record itself and thus not proper for summary correction. Furthermore, there were inconsistencies: Alicia was alleged to be the second child but her record stated she was the third; Virginia was alleged to be the third child but her record stated she was the fourth; and Vicente’s record indicated his father was 26 in 1952, while petitioner was only 24. Finally, the publication of the petition was defective because its title used the names “Teresita Chan” and “Alicia Chan” instead of the names actually in the record (“Teresita Uy” and “Alicia Ching”), failing to comply with the jurisdictional requirement of publishing the true names sought to be changed.