G.R. No.

L-20018 April 30, 1966

CHIU HAP CHIU, petitioner-appellee,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant.

Facts: Chiu Hap Chiu seeks to change his name to Lo Hap Chiu in a petition filed before the Court of
First Instance of Davao. He testified that he was 30 years old, single, a doctor of medicine, and a
resident of Davao City; that the name given him at birth was Lo Hap Chiu; that during his school days,
or from elementary school to college, he was called by his classmates as Lo Hap Chiu for which reason
he desires to have said name adopted instead of Chiu Hap Chiu to avoid confusion in the use of his
name; and that the name given him in his alien certificate of registration is Chiu Hap Chiu. The court a
quo granted the petition and found that petitioner was born on February 1, 1930 at Kulagsu, Fuken,
China; that he is a Chinese citizen holding an alien certificate of residence; that he is a physician by
profession and has no criminal record; that he has paid all his taxes to the government; that he desires
to change his name from Chiu Hap Chiu to Lo Hap Chiu for the reason that the latter is the name he
used while studying in the school and because his present name and surname are the same. The
government opposed the petition in view of its failure to find sufficient justification for the change of
name desired by petitioner.
Issue: Whether or not petitioner has sufficient justification for his petition to change his name
Ruling: This Court has already had occasion to express the view that the State has an interest in the
names borne by individuals and entitles for purpose of identification and that a change of name is a
privilege and not a matter of right. The following may be considered among others, as proper and
reasonable causes that may warrant the grant of a petition for change of name: (1) when the name is
ridiculous, tainted with dishonor, or is extremely difficult to write or pronounce; (2) when the request
for change is a consequence of a change of status, such as when a natural child is acknowledged or
legitimized; and (3) when the change is necessary to avoid confusion (Tolentino, Civil Code of the
Philippines, 1953 ed., Vol. I, p. 660).
1äwphï1.ñë

Petitioner has not shown any proper or compelling reason that may justify the request for change of
name other than his desire to use the name Lo Hap Chiu on the alleged reason that that is the name
given him in his birth certificate and in the schools he attended, but his claim was not satisfactorily
proven, for aside from his own testimony and a photostatic copy of a certification issued in his favor
as Doctor of Medicine by the University of Santo Tomas wherein it appears that his name is Lo Hap
Chiu, there is nothing in the record to show that he used said name from grade school to college for he
failed to present any documentary evidence to prove it. The truth is that he was registered in the
Bureau of Immigration as Chiu Hap Chiu and in all the clearances secured by him from said Bureau
the name used therein was Chiu Hap Chiu thereby indicating that he considered himself as such as
regards the public. He has not shown that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name,
and as a matter of fact he was referred to as Dr. Chiu Hap Chiu in his clearance from the Court of First
Instance of Davao. Since the State has an interest in the name borne by an individual, especially an
alien, and the latter's identity as a rule is established by the name appearing in his alien certificate of
registration, we find no plausible reason for authorizing the change of name desired by petitioner.
 G.R. No. L-48762 September 12, 1988

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,

vs.
HON. SEGUNDO M. ZOSA, Judge of the Court of Firt Instance of Samar, Catbalogan,
Samar, Branch I, and LEE KING SING, respondents.

Facts: On February 10, 1977, respondent Lee King Sing filed a petition with the CFI of Samar for
change of name. The lower court issued an order setting the petition for hearing. Said order was
subsequently published in the Leyte Forum on February 22, March 1, and March 3,1977. Petitioner
through the Solicitor General filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the name sought
to be adopted by respondent and other names by which he is known are not indicated or included in
the title of the petition. Respondent filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss, however the lower
court denied the aforesaid motion. Subsequently, the trial court granted the petition hence the appeal

Issue: WHETHER OR NOT THAT RESPONDENT JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
OF SAMAR ERRED IN TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME
DESPITE SUBSTANTIAL DEFECT IN THE PETITION AND PUBLICATION OF THE NOTICE OF
HEARING.

Ruling: The proceeding for a change of name is a proceeding in rem. Jurisdiction to hear and
determine the petition for change of name is acquired after due publication of the order containing
certain data, among which is the name sought to be adopted, a matter which should be indicated in
the title of the petition In a petition for change of name the title of the petition should include (1) the
applicant's real name, (2) his aliases or other names, if any, and (3) the name sought to be adopted
even if these data are found in the body of the petition. For the Publication to be valid and effective,
the published order should reproduce the title of the petition containing the data already stated and
should contain correct information as to (1) the name or names of the applicant; (2) the cause for the
changed name, and (3) the new name asked for.

In the present case, the petition itself, as well as the order published, carries the following title "In Re:
Petition for Change of Name Lee King Sing, Petitioner." It does not contain the name (Antonio C. Lee)
sought to be adopted and the names by which petitioner was known to his friends and associates. The
title should have read "In the Matter of the Change of Name of Lee King Sing, otherwise known as
Antonio or Tony to Antonio C. Lee, Lee King Sing, Petitioner." The petition does not indicate in its title
or caption that herein respondent desires to change his name to Antonio C. Lee. The published order
setting his petition for hearing reproduced that defective title. The failure to include the name sought
to be adopted in the title of the petition nor in the title or caption of the notices published in the
newspapers renders the trial court without jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition.
 G.R. No. L-16384 April 26, 1962

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO CHANGE THE NAME OF GO CHANG TO

JAYME S. TAN,
JAYME S. TAN, petitioner-appellee,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-appellant

Facts: On March 12, 1959, Go Chang, a citizen of the Republic of Nationalist China, but born in the
Philippines, filed with the Court of First Instance of Cebu, a verified petition for change of name, to
Jayme S. Tan. The jurisdictional facts as to age, status, citizenship, residence, place of birth and name
of parents were alleged, the petition further stated that he (petitioner), was registered with the Local
Civil Registrar and the Immigration Bureau under the name of Go Chang; baptized as Jaime Descals
Go Chang; that at tender age, he was taken under the care of an uncle; that in his studies (from Grade
I to 2nd year in College), he has been enrolled under the name Jayme S. Tan, Tan being the surname
of his uncle and the middle initial "S" standing for the surname of his mother Lim Sy; that all his
friends know him as Jayme S. Tan; and that by seeking the change of his name it was not his intention
to conceal or hide any unfavorable record but to correct an error. The petitioner testified that when he
started schooling at the "Colegio de Santa Maria", San Juan, Rizal, he was enrolled under the name of
Jayme S. Tan, which name he has continuously used up to College; that he desires to change his name
to clear up an error and avoid confusion and that because of the discrepancy about his name in his
school records and alien certificate of registration, the Board of Medical Examiners refused to issue
him a "Medical Number" to be considered as a medical student, unless he secures a court order,
allowing him to use the name Jayme S. Tan, appearing in his school records. The Provincial Fiscal,
who represented the Solicitor General filed no written opposition to the petition but attended the
hearing and cross-examined the petitioner. After trial, the lower court granted the petition. The
Provincial Fiscal of Cebu, moved for the reconsideration but it was subsequently denied.

Issues: Whether or not The lower court erred in taking cognizance of the instant petition for change
of name filed despite the fact that it did not acquire jurisdiction over the case by reason of a substantial
defect in the petition and publication of the Order for hearing

Whether or not The lower court erred in granting the petition despite the fact that the
petitioner failed to adduce any proper and reasonable reason for changing his name.

Ruling: A discrepancy exists in the petition and the published Order. Whereas in the published Order
the name of petitioner was spelled Jaime S. Tan, the verified petition spell his name as Jayme S. Tan.
Even in the affidavit of the publisher of "La Prensa" (Exh. A), the name appearing is Jaime S. Tan.
Petitions for change of name being proceedings in rem, strict compliance with the requirement of
publication is essential, for it is by such means that the court acquires jurisdiction. Considering the
fact that the proceedings is one for change of name, the defect in the petition and the order, as to the
spelling of the name of the petitioner, is substantial, because it did not correctly identify the party to
said proceedings. It may be argued that the difference in the spelling is minor, that is the "i" has been
erroneously typewritten as "y" or vice versa. The difference of one letter in a name may mean the
distinction of identity of one person with that of another. If the projected change means so great to the
petitioner, he should, at least, have exerted efforts to correct the mistake, if it was a mistake at all.

We find also that no reasonable circumstance exists or was proven to warrant petitioner's change of
name. Petitioner alleges that he was baptized as Jayme Go Chang and that throughout his school days
he has been enrolled under the name of Jayme S. Tan. His own documents, however, belie said
allegations because his baptismal certificate shows that his baptismal name is "Jaime Descals Go
Chang". Except his own testimony, no other evidence was introduced to show that in school and to his
friends he was using and/or was known by the name of Jayme S. Tan. Because of the discrepancy
existing in his school records and his alien certificate of registration, the Board of Medical Examiners
allegedly refused to give him a "Medical number" to be considered a medical student, unless he secures
a court order allowing him to use the name Jayme S. Tan. No corroborative evidence was adduced to
show the veracity of his assertion. The fact that the Certificate of Enrollment issued by the
"Southwestern College" mentions a certain Jaime S. Tan as officially enrolled in the College of
Medicine, would show that what petitioner has alleged to the effect that since his first enrollment
Grade I until college, he was continuously using the name Jayme S. Tan, cannot be true. If the purpose
of changing his name is to correct an error or avoid confusion, the petitioner should retain the use of
his name "Go Chang" appearing in the Civil Registrar and Bureau of Immigration, the real and official
name, rather than change it. The real name of a person is that given him in the Civil register, not the
name by which he was baptized in his church or by which he has been known in the community, or
which he has adopted