G.R. No. L-48762 September 12, 1988
Republic of the Philippines, petitioner, vs. Hon. Segundo M. Zosa, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Samar, Catbalogan, Samar, Branch I, and Lee King Sing, respondents.

FACTS

On February 10, 1977, respondent Lee King Sing, a naturalized Filipino citizen, filed a petition with the Court of First Instance of Samar to change his name to Antonio C. Lee. He alleged that he was known to his associates as “Antonio” or “Tony” and desired a Filipino-sounding name. The court issued an order setting the petition for hearing, which was published in a newspaper.
The Republic, through the Solicitor General, moved to dismiss the petition on the ground of a substantial defect: the title of the petition, “In Re: Petition for Change of Name Lee King Sing, Petitioner,” failed to indicate the name sought to be adopted (Antonio C. Lee) or the aliases (“Antonio” or “Tony”) by which he was known. The trial court denied the motion and, after hearing, granted the petition for change of name. The Republic appealed, arguing the trial court erred in taking cognizance of the petition despite this fatal defect in both the petition and the published notice.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of First Instance acquired jurisdiction over the petition for change of name despite the failure to include the name sought to be adopted and the petitioner’s aliases in the title of the petition and the published order.

RULING

No, the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction. The Supreme Court reversed the appealed order and denied the petition for change of name. A change of name proceeding is in rem; jurisdiction is acquired through proper publication of the notice of hearing. Established jurisprudence mandates that the title of the petition and the published order must include three essential pieces of information: the applicant’s real name, any aliases or other names, and the new name sought to be adopted.
The legal logic is grounded in the purpose of publication, which is to give the public adequate notice. The ordinary reader typically only glances at the caption or title of a published notice. If the crucial details—the desired new name and any aliases—are buried only in the body and not in the title, the notice is ineffective. The public may be misled or fail to recognize the petition’s subject, defeating the very essence of in rem proceedings, which is to bind all persons. In this case, the title “In Re: Petition for Change of Name Lee King Sing, Petitioner” was defective as it omitted “Antonio C. Lee” and the aliases “Antonio” or “Tony.” Since the published order reproduced this defective title, the publication was invalid. Consequently, the court never acquired jurisdiction to hear and decide the petition, rendering its order granting the name change void. Dismissal of the petition was therefore required.