You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c3b4b?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[IN MATTER OF CHANGE OF NAME OF TRINIDAD R. ASENSI. TRINIDAD R v. REPUBLIC](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c3b4b?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c3b4b}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. L-18047, Dec 26, 1963 ]

IN MATTER OF CHANGE OF NAME OF TRINIDAD R. ASENSI. TRINIDAD R v. REPUBLIC +

DECISION

119 Phil. 72

[ G.R. No. L-18047, December 26, 1963 ]

IN THE MATTER OF THE CHANGE OF NAME OF TRINIDAD R. ASENSI. TRINIDAD R, ASENSI, REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER, GRACIANO ASENSI, PETITIONER, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR.

D E C I S I O N

This is an appeal taken by the Solicitor General in behalf of the Republic of the Philippines against the decision or order of the Court of First Instance of Cebu granting the petition to change the name of petitioner from Trinidad Rodriguez to Trinidad Asensi.

After proper notice and hearing as provided fry the Rules of Court in matters of change of name, the trial court found as undisputed that Trinidad Rodriguez is the natural child of Luisa Rodriguez and Graciano Asensi, both of whom at the time of her conception and birth, were single. Later, the two parents were legally married and, according to the father himself who testified at the hearing, took the child Trinidad in the fold of their family. There is no question, therefore, that the minor Trinidad has been duly legitimated.

Because of this legal consequence, the Government's counsel opposed the petition and now appeals the decision on the sole contention that the judicial change of name is not necessary as the legitimated child can, without judicial approval, adopt her parents' surnames. (Arts. 272 in relation to Art. 264 of the Civil Code.)

We find the objection of the Republic to be too technical. There is no legal prohibition against obtaining a judicial confirmation of a legal right. It may be a superfluity, but it is not against law, customs, or morals. It does no harm to anybody. No one is prejudiced thereby. We deem this appeal a waste of time and effort.

Wherefore, judgment of the lower court is hereby affirmed. It is so ordered.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.


tags