REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v. revert to his former surname.

RTC granted the

COURT OF APPEALS AND MAXIMO petition and CA affirmed.
WONG
G.R. No. 97906, May 21, 1992, ISSUE:
SECOND DIVISION, 1) Are the reasons given by private
REGALADO, J. respondent in his petition for change
of name valid, sufficient and proper
While it is true that the statutory fiat under to warrant the granting of said
Article 365 of the Civil Code is to the effect that an petition? Yes
adopted child shall bear the surname of the adopter, it 2) Will the change of name affect his
must nevertheless be borne in mind that the change of status as an adopted child? No
the surname of the adopted child is more an incident
rather than the object of adoption proceedings. HELD:
Maximo Wong is the legitimate son of It bears stressing at this point that to
Maximo Alcala, Sr., and Segundina Y. Alcala. justify a request for change of name, petitioner
When he was but two and a half years old and must show not only some proper or compelling
then known as Maximo Alcala, Jr., and his sister reason therefor but also that he will be
Margaret Alcala, was then nine years old, they prejudiced by the use of his true and official
were, with the consent of their natural parents name.[24] Among the grounds for change of name
and by order of the court in Special Case No. which have been held valid are: (a) When the
593] issued on September 9, 1967, adopted by name is ridiculous, dishonorable or extremely
spouses Hoong Wong and Concepcion Ty difficult to write or pronounce; (b) When the
Wong, both naturalized Filipinos. Hoong Wong, change results as a legal consequence, as in
now deceased, was an insurance agent while legitimation; (c) When the change will avoid
Concepcion Ty Wong was a high school teacher. confusion;[25] (d) Having continuously used and
They decided to adopt the children as they been known since childhood by a Filipino name,
remained childless after fifteen years of unaware of her alien parentage ;] (e) A sincere
marriage. The couple showered their adopted desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of
children with parental love and reared them as former alienage, all in good faith and without
their own children. prejudicing anybody;[27] and (f) When the
surname causes embarrassment and there is no
Upon reaching the age of twenty-two, showing that the desired change of name was for
respondent, by then married and a junior a fraudulent purpose or that the change of name
Engineering student at Notre Dame University, would prejudice public interest.
Cotabato City, filed a petition to change his
name to Maximo Alcala, Jr. He averred that the In granting or denying petitions for
use of surname Wong embarrassed and isolated change of name, the question of proper and
him from his relatives and friends, as the same reasonable cause is left to the sound discretion of
suggests a Chinese ancestry when in truth and in the court. The evidence presented need only be
fact he is aMuslim Filipino residing in a Muslim satisfactory to the court and not all the best
community, and he wants to erase any evidence available.[29] Summarizing, in special
implication whatsoever of alien nationality; that proceedings for change of name, what is
he is being ridiculed for carrying a Chinese involved is not a mere matter of allowance or
surname, thus hampering his business and social disallowance of the request, but a judicious
life; and that his adoptive mother does not evaluation of the sufficiency and propriety of the
oppose his desire to justifications
advanced in support thereof, mindful of the determination being lodged in the courts.
consequent results in the event of its grant and
with the sole prerogative for making such While it is true that the statutory fiat
under Article 365 of the Civil Code is to the "Art. 189. Adoption shall have the following
effect that an adopted child shall bear the effects:
surname of the adopter, it must nevertheless be (1) For civil purposes, the adopted shall be
borne in mind that the change of the surname of deemed to be the legitimate child of the adopters
the adopted child is more an incident rather than and both shall acquire the reciprocal rights and
the object of adoption proceedings.[30] The act of obligations arising from the relationship of
adoption fixes a status, viz., that of parent and parent and child, including the right of the
child. More technically, it is an act by which adopted to use the surname of the adopters ;"
relations of paternity and affiliation are (Emphasis supplied.)
recognized as legally existing between persons xxx
not so related by nature. It has been defined as
the taking into one's family of the child of A petition for change of name is a remedy
another as son or daughter and heir and allowed under our law only by way of exception
conferring on it a title to the rights and privileges to the mandatory provisions of the Civil Code on
of such. The purpose of an adoption proceeding the use of surname. The law fixes the surname
is to effect this new status of relationship that may be used by a person, at least
between the child and its adoptive parents, the inceptively, and it may be changed only upon
change of name which frequently accompanies judicial permission granted in the exercise of
adoption being more an incident than the object sound discretion. Section 1 of Rule 103, in
of the proceeding.[31] The welfare of the child is specifying the parties who may avail of said
the primary consideration in the determination remedy, uses the generic term "persons" to
of an application for adoption. On this point, signify all natural persons regardless of status. If
there is unanimous agreement.] a legitimate person may,
under certain judicially accepted exceptional
It is the usual effect of a decree of circumstances, petition the court for a change
adoption to transfer from the natural parents to of name, we do not see any legal basis or
the adoptive parents the custody of the child's logic in discriminating against the
person, the duty of obedience owing by the availment of such a remedy by an adopted
child, and all other legal consequences and child. In other words, Article 365 is not an
incidents of the natural relation, in the same exception, much less can it bar resort, to
manner as if the child had been born of such Rule 103.
adoptive parents in lawful wedlock, subject,
however, to such limitations and restrictions as "Rule 103 of the Rules of Court has its
may be by statute imposed. [33] More specifically primordial purpose which (State) is to give a
under the present state of our law, the Family person an opportunity to improve his personality
Code, superseding the pertinent provisions of the and provide his best interest (Calderon vs.
Civil Code and of the Child and Youth Welfare Republic, 19 SCRA 721). In the instant case, the
Code on the matter, [34] relevantly provides in court a quo found the petition of Maximo Wong
this wise with regard to the issue involved in this for change of name justifiable after due hearing,
case: thus its ‘factual findings and appreciation of
testimonies count heavily and need not be
disturbed unless for strong and cogent reasons
because the trial court is in a better position to
examine real evidence as well as to observe the
demeanor of the witnesses while testifying in the
case (Baliwag Transit, Inc. vs. CA, 147 SCRA
82). Moreover, the trial court could take judicial
notice of other existing factors
in the community where herein respondent which it considers material in its judicious
determination of the case. x x x. her to report for work so she will not be able to
testify at the hearing of her petition yet to be
"Additionally, herein respondent is already of scheduled. Judge Elepano granted the motion
age and as such he can decide what is best for and ordered that notice of the taking of the
him. His experience with regards (sic) his social deposition be furnished to the OSG (the only
and business dealings is personal and it is only known oppositor). The judge issued an order
him (sic) who can attest to the same. Finding his setting the hearing for the petition for adoption
predicament's proper remedy is solely through and directed the publication of the said order. A
legal process, herein respondent accordingly copy of said order as well as a copy of the said
filed a petition pursuant to Rule 103 of the Rules petition for adoption was likewise sent to the
of Court which was granted by the Court a quo." OSG. Corazon's deposition was taken. Despite
notice, no representative from the OSG appeared
It is not fair to construe the desired to oppose the taking of the deposition. The OSG
reversion of private respondent to the use of the filed an opposition to the deposition averring
name of his parents by nature as crass that Section
ingratitude. To go by the Solicitor General's 1 of Rule 24 of the Rules of Court allows
suggestion that private respondent should have deposition by leave of court after jurisdiction has
his adoption revoked if he wants to use the been obtained over any defendant or property
surname of his natural father would be to exact subject of the action. Since the jurisdictional
too dear a toll for making use of an appropriate requirement of publication has not been
and valid remedy available under the law. complied with, the OSG contends that the court
has no jurisdiction over the defendant but the
judge denied the opposition. After the notice of
the hearing had been duly published, the counsel
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES v.
HON. ZENAIDA ELEPANO & CORAZON for Corazon presented evidence. Despite notice,
PUNSALAN the OSG failed to appear in the said hearing and
G.R. No. 92542, October 15, 1991, all other hearings. The judge granted the
SECOND DIVISION (Paras, petition. The OSG filed a motion for
J.) reconsideration of the decision but the judge
denied.
Key Doctrine: “In an adoption case which involves
the status of a person, there is no particular defendant to ISSUES:
speak of since the action is one in rem. Jurisdiction over
the person of the defendant is a non-essential condition Are depositions not allowed in
for the taking of a deposition.” adoption proceedings until publication has
been complied with?
Corazon Punsalan filed a verified
petition for adoption praying that after due HELD:
notice and hearing, Pinky Punsalan, the daughter
No. The rule cited by the OSG is
of her full blood brother, and Ellyn Mae Urbano,
inapplicable. While it is true that in an action in
the daughter of her full blood sister, be declared
her daughters by adoption. Corazon filed a personam, personal service of summons within
motion for taking deposition on the ground that the forum or voluntary appearance in the case is
she received an urgent call from the United essential for the court to acquire jurisdiction
Nations requiring over the person of the defendant, in an adoption
case which involves the status of a person, there
is no particular defendant to speak of since the
action is one in rem. In such case, jurisdiction
over the
person of the defendant is a non-essential condition for the taking of a deposition for the
jurisdiction of the court is based on its power begot three children, namely: Keith, Charmaine,
over the res, to render judgment with respect to and Joseph Anthony. During the early years of
such "thing" (or status, as in this case) so as to their marriage, Cang couple’s relationship was
bar indifferently all who might be minded to undisturbed until Anna Maria learned of her
make an objection against the right so husband’s alleged extramarital affairs with
established. Wilma Soco, a family friend of the Clavanos.
Thereafter, Anna Maria filed a petition for legal
Publication of the scheduled hearing for
separation with alimony pendente lite with the
the petition for adoption is necessary for the
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Cebu
validity of a decree of adoption but not for the
which rendered a decision approving the joint
purpose merely of taking a deposition. In taking
manifestation of the Cang spouses providing that
a deposition, no substantial rights are affected
they agreed to live separately and apart or from
since depositions may or may not be presented
bed and board. They further agreed that the
or may even be objected to when formally
children shall be entitled to a monthly support of
offered as evidence at the trial of the main case
P1,000 and that Anna Maria shall be entitled to
later on. Due to urgent and compelling reasons
enter into any contract or agreement with
beyond her control, Corazon could not be
another without the written consent of her
present to testify at the trial of the main case for
husband or any undertaking or acts that
adoption. The OSG, was notified of the
ordinarily requires husband’s consent. Petitioner
scheduled taking of the deposition, as well as of
then left for the United States where he sought a
all the hearings of the petition for adoption, but
divorce from Anna Marie before the Second
the OSG chose not to attend ALL the said
Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada.
hearings, without explanation. Finally, the
Said court issued the divorce decree that also
philosophy behind adoption statutes is to
granted sole custody of the three minor children
promote the welfare of the child and every
to Anna Marie, reserving rights of visitation at
reasonable intendment should be sustained to
all reasonable times and places to petitioner.
promote that objective. The record shows that
Corazon's adoption of the minors shall redound
Meanwhile, private respondent spouses
to the best interests of the latter.
Ronald Clavano and Maria Clara Clavano,
respectively the brother and sister-in-law of
Anna Maria filed a Special Proceeding for the
HERBERT CANG v. COURT OF adoption of the three minor Cang children. The
APPEALS and SPOUSES RONALD petition bears the signature of then 14-year-old
CLAVANO and MARIA CLARA Keith signifying consent to his adoption. Anna
CLAVANO Marie likewise filed an affidavit of consent
G.R. No. 105308, September 25, 1998, Romero, alleging that her husband had evaded his legal
J. obligation to support his children; that her
The written consent of the natural parent is brothers and sisters including Ronald V.
indispensable for the validity of the decree of adoption. Clavano, had been helping her in taking care of
Nevertheless, the requirement of written consent can the children; that because she would be going to
be dispensed with if the parent has abandoned the the United States to attend to a family business,
child or that such parent is insane or hopelessly leaving the children would be a problem and
intemperate. would naturally hamper (her) job- seeking
FACTS. venture abroad; and that her husband had long
forfeited his parental rights over the children for
Petitioner Herbert Cang and Anna Marie the following reasons:
Clavano, who were married on January 27,
1973,
1. The decision in the Civil Case No. JD-707 allowed her to enter into any
 contract without her husband’s ISSUE.
written consent;
2. Her husband had left the Philippines Can minor children be legally adopted without
to be an illegal alien in the US; and the written consent of a natural parent on the
3. Her husband had divorced her. ground that the latter has abandoned them?

Upon learning of the petition for HELD.

adoption, petitioner immediately returned to the
Philippines and filed an opposition thereto, YES. Article 188(2) of the Family Code
alleging that, although private respondents provides that the written consent of the parents
Ronald and Maria Clara Clavano were by nature of the child x x x shall be necessary.
financially capable of supporting the children Notably, such requirement is also embodied in
while his finances were too meager compared to Rule 99 of the Rules of Court. The written
theirs, he could not in conscience, allow consent of the natural parent is indispensable for
anybody to strip him of his parental authority the validity of the decree of
over his beloved children. Pending resolution of adoption. Nevertheless, the requirement of
the petition for adoption, petitioner moved to written consent can be dispensed with if the
reacquire custody over his children alleging that
parent has abandoned the child or that such
Anna Marie had transferred to the United States
parent is insane or hopelessly intemperate. The
thereby leaving custody of their children to
court may acquire jurisdiction over the case even
private respondents.
without the written consent of the parents or one
of the parents provided that the petition for
RTC of Cebu City Branch 19 rendered
adoption alleges facts sufficient to warrant
an order finding that Anna Maria had, in effect,
exemption from compliance therewith. This is in
relinquished custody over her children and
consonance with the liberality with which this
therefore such custody should be transferred to
Court treats the procedural aspect of adoption.
the father. The RTC of Cebu City Branch 14
issued a decree of adoption, taking into In the instant case, records disclose that
consideration among others the fact that the petitioners conduct did not manifest a settled
Cang children had since birth developed close purpose to forego all parental duties and
filial ties with the respondents and that they had relinquish all parental claims over his children as
substantial assets and income to support the to constitute abandonment. Physical
children. The RTC also quoted with approval the estrangement alone, without financial and
evaluation and recommendation of the RTC
moral desertion, is not tantamount to
Social Worker in her Child Study Support that
abandonment. While admittedly, petitioner
abandonment of a child by its (sic) parent is
was physically absent as he was then in the
commonly specified by statute as a ground for United States, he was not remiss in his natural
dispensing with his consent to its (sic) and legal
adoption.” The CA affirmed the decree of obligations of love, care and support for his
adoption. children. He maintained regular communication
with his wife and children through letters and
telephone. He used to send packages by mail and
catered to their whims.

The liberality with which this Court treats

matters leading to adoption insofar as it carries
out the
beneficent purposes of the law to ensure the therefrom, ever mindful that the paramount
rights and privileges of the adopted child arising consideration is the overall benefit and interest of
the adopted child, should be understood in its “Aaron Joseph”, the same being the name with
proper context and perspective. The Courts which he was baptized in keeping with religious
position should not be misconstrued or tradition, and by which he has been called by his
misinterpreted as to extend to inferences beyond adoptive family, relatives and friends since May
the contemplation of law and jurisprudence. The 6, 1993 when he arrived at private respondents’
discretion to approve adoption proceedings is residence.
not to be anchored solely on best interests of the
Petitioner opposed the petition for
child but likewise, with due regard to the natural
change of name on the ground that these
rights of the parents over the child.
petitions should be conducted and pursued as
two separate proceedings. The trial court ruled in
The transfer of custody over the children to
favor of respondent spouses.
Anna Marie by virtue of the decree of legal
separation did not, of necessity, deprive Petitioner argues that a petition for
petitioner of parental authority for the purpose of adoption and a petition for change of name are
placing the children up for adoption. two special proceedings which, in substance and
purpose, are different from and are not related to
each other, being respectively governed by
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, distinct sets of law and rules. On the other hand,
PETITIONER, VS. HON. JOSE R. respondent spouses predicated their basis on
HERNANDEZ, IN HIS CAPACITY AS Sec. 5 Rule 2 of the ROC allowing permissive
PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL joinder of causes of action in order to avoid
TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 158, PASIG multiplicity of suits and argues that under the
CITY AND SPOUSES VAN MUNSON Y rules, there is not prohibition against a joinder
NAVARRO AND REGINA MUNSON for adoption and a change of name.
YANDRADE, RESPONDENTS.
Issue
G.R. No. 117209, February 09, 1996, SECOND
DIVISION, Regalado, J. Is the lower court erroneous for granting
the prayer for change of name? Is there a lawful
Key Doctrine: The change of the surname
ground for the change of name?
of the adoptee as a result of the adoption
and to follow that of the adopter does not Ruling
lawfully extend to or include the proper or No, though the law allows the adoptee,
given name. as a matter of right and obligation, to bear the
*NB this case was decided prior to AM surname of the adopter, upon issuance of the
02-6- 02 SC decree of adoption. It is the change of the
Facts adoptee’s surname to follow that of the adopter
which is the natural and necessary consequence
On March 10, 1994, respondent spouses,
of a grant of adoption and must specifically be
filed a petition to adopt the minor Kevin Earl
contained in the order of the court, in fact, even
Bartolome Moran, alleging the jurisdictional
if not prayed for by petitioner.However, the
facts required by Rule 99 of the ROC. In the
given or proper name, also known as the first or
very same petition, respondent spouses also
Christian name, of the adoptee must remain as it
prayed for the change of the first name of said
was originally registered in the civil register.
minor adoptee to
The creation of an adoptive relationship does not
confer upon the adopter a license to change the
adoptee’s registered Christian or first name. The
automatic change thereof, premised solely upon proceeding, such that a prayer therefor furtively
the adoption thus granted, is beyond the purview inserted in a petition for adoption, as in this case,
of a decree of adoption. Neither is it a mere cannot properly be granted.
incident in nor an adjunct of an adoption Changing the given or proper name of a
person as recorded in the civil register is a other judicial pronouncements affecting the status of
substantial change in one’s official or legal name individuals, is the local civil registrar’s office as well as
and cannot be authorized without a judicial the court which rendered the judgment.
order. The purpose of the statutory procedure
authorizing a change of name is simply to have, Corazon L. Chichioco filed a petition for the
issuance of letters of administration and
wherever possible, a record of the change, and in
settlement of estate of the late Elena Lising
keeping with the object of the statute, a court to before the RTC of Paniqui, Tarlac, where it was
which the application is made should normally docketed as Spec. Proc. No. 204. Chichioco
make its decree recording such change. claimed that she was the niece and heir of Lising
The official name of a person whose who died intestate on July 31, 1998. The
deceased left real properties located in the
birth is registered in the civil register is the name municipalities of Ramos and Paniqui, Tarlac, as
appearing therein, If a change in one’s name is well as assorted pieces of jewelry and money
desired, this can only be done by filing which were allegedly in the possession of Ana
Joyce S. Reyes, a grandniece of the deceased.
and strictly complying with the substantive and
Chichioco prayed that she be appointed
procedural requirements for a special proceeding administrator of the estate, upon payment of a
for change of name under Rule 103 of the Rules bond, pending settlement and distribution of
of Court, wherein the sufficiency of the reasons Lising’s properties to the legal heirs.
or grounds therefor can be threshed out and
accordingly determined. Reyes filed an Opposition to the petition,
claiming that she was an adopted child of Lising
A petition for change of name being a and the latter’s husband, Serafin Delos Santos,
proceeding in rem, strict compliance with all the who died on November 30, 1970. She asserted
requirements therefor is indispensable in order that the petition should be dismissed and that the
to vest the court with jurisdiction for its appointment of an administrator was
adjudication. It is an independent and discrete unnecessary, since she was the only heir of
Lising who passed away without leaving any
special proceeding, in and by itself, governed by debts. Reyes attachedthe Certification issued by
its own set of rules. A fortiori, it cannot be the Municipal Civil Registrar of Paniqui, Tarlac
granted by means of any other proceeding. stating that on page 76, Book No. 01 of the
Register of Court Decrees, Reyes was adopted
by Elena Lising and Serafin Delos Santos
ANA JOYCE S. REYES v. JUDGE CESAR pursuant to a decision rendered in Spec. Proc.
M. SOTERO, et al. No. 1410 by Judge Julian Lustre of the Court of
G.R. No. 167405, 16 February 2006, First Instance (CFI) of Tarlac. Reyes also
FIRST DIVISION, (Ynares- submitted a Certification issued by the Clerk of
Santiago, J.) Court of the RTC-Tarlac City, stating that a
judgment was rendered in Spec. Proc. No. 1410
It should be borne in mind that an adoption decree is a on December 21, 1968 decreeing Reyes’s
public document required by law to be entered into the adoption by Elena Lising and Serafin Delos
public records, the official repository of which, as well Santos. She also presented a copy of
as all Judicial Form No. 43 indicating that the
adoption decree was on file in the General
Docket of the RTC-Tarlac City. Reyes likewise
submitted a Decree of Final Distribution issued
by the Philippine Veterans Affairs Office
(PVAO) showing that, upon the death of Serafin
Delos Santos, death benefits were paid to his
widow, Elena Lising, and his "daughter", Ana
Joyce Delos Santos, in accordance with pertinent
provisions of law.
Chichioco and her alleged co-heirs filed before adoption of Reyes took place in 1968 since the
the Court of Appeals a petition for annulment of Provincial Prosecutor of Tarlac and the Office of
the adoption decree docketed as SP No. 53457. the Solicitor General (OSG) had no records of the
They claimed that no proceedings for the adoption case. The CA dismissed SP No. 53457
for failure to comply with the third paragraph of Documents consisting of entries in public
Section 4, Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. records made in the performance of a duty by a
Chichioco, et al. filed a Comment to the public officer are prima facie evidence of the
opposition stating that reasonable doubts have facts therein stated. As such, the certifications
been cast on Reyes’s claim that she was legally issued by the local civil registrar and the clerk of
adopted due allegedly to certain "badges of court regarding details of Reyes’s adoption
fraud." which are entered in the records kept under their
official custody, are prima facie evidence of the
The CA rendered judgment nullifying the facts contained therein. These certifications
resolutions of the trial court. It held that the suffice as proof of the fact of Reyes’s adoption
presiding judge, Judge Cesar M. Sotero, gravely by the Delos Santos spouses until contradicted
abused his discretion in appointing his branch or overcome by sufficient evidence. Mere
clerk of court as special administrator. Citing "imputations of irregularities" will not cast a
Balanay, Jr. v. Martinez, the CA reasoned that "cloud of doubt" on the adoption decree since
such act could engender a suspicion that Judge the certifications and its contents are presumed
Sotero and his clerk are in cahoots in milking the valid until proof to the contrary is offered.
decedent’s estate. Moreover, Atty. Saguyod
failed to comply with the requirements of a bond In this regard, it must be pointed out that such
and inventory and could not therefore take contrary proof can be presented only in a
control and possession of any of the decedent’s separate action brought principally for the
properties. purpose of nullifying the adoption decree. The
latter cannot be assailed collaterally in a
ISSUE: proceeding for the settlement of a decedent’s
Is the CA correct in holding that Reyes had to estate, as categorically held in Santos v.
prove the validity of her adoption due to Aranzanso. Accordingly, Chichioco, et al.
imputations of irregularities in view of section cannot assail in these proceedings the validity of
47 of rule 39? the adoption decree in order to defeat Reyes’s
claim that she is the sole heir of the decedent.
RULING: Absent a categorical pronouncement in an
NO. The Court agrees with Reyes that she need appropriate proceeding that the decree of
not prove her legal adoption by any evidence adoption is void, the certifications regarding the
other than those which she had already presented matter, as well as the facts stated therein, should
before the trial court. To recall, Reyes submitted be deemed legitimate, genuine and real. Reyes’s
a certification from the local civil registrar’s status as an adopted child of the decedent
office that the adoption decree was registered remains unrebutted and no serious challenge has
therein and also a copy of Judicial Form No. 43 been brought against her standing as such.
and a certification issued by the clerk of court Therefore, for as long as Reyes’s adoption is
that the decree was on file in the General Docket considered valid, Chichioco, et al. cannot claim
of the RTC-Tarlac City. Both certifications were any interest in the decedent’s estate. For this
issued under the seal of the issuing offices and reason, the Court agrees with Reyes that Spec.
were signed by the proper officers. These are Proc. No. 204 should be dismissed.
thus presumed to have been regularly issued as
part of the official duties that said public officers
perform.
LANDINGIN v. REPUBLIC (2006)
G.R. No. 164948 | 2006-06-27

KEY DOCTRINES/TOPICS:
Adoption Statutes are Liberally Construed for
the Benefit of the Child; Persons Whose Written
Consent are Needed to the Adoption; Purpose
for the Indispensable Requirement of Consent
and
Notice to the Natural Parents; The Petitioner the Legal Guardian; Abandonment Should Evince
Should Have Adduced the Written Consent of a Settled Purpose to Forego all Parental Duties;
When Amelia Left for Italy, She Did Not Intend ISSUES & RULINGS:
to Abandon her Children; The Affidavit of
Consent of Petitioner’s Presented are A. Adoption Statutes are Liberally
Inadmissible as Evidence; The Financial Construed for the Benefit of the Child
Capacity of the Prospective Parents Should be
Carefully Evaluated. 1. It has been the policy of the Court to adhere to
the liberal concept that adoption statutes, being
FACTS: humane and salutary, hold the interest and
welfare of the child to be of paramount
Petitioner Diwata Landingin was an consideration and are designed to provide
American citizen of Filipino parentage. She filed homes, parental care and education for
a petition for the adoption of 3 minors, who unfortunate, needy or orphaned children and
were all the natural children of Manuel Ramos, give them the protection of society and family in
Diwata’s brother, and Amelia Ramos. She the person of the adopter as well as to allow
alleged in her petition that when her brother childless couples or persons to experience the
died, the children were left to their paternal joys of parenthood and give them legally a child
grandmother because Amelia, their biological in the person of the adopted for the
mother went to Italy, re- married there and had 2 manifestation of their natural parental instincts.
children by her second marriage and no longer
communicated from the time she left up to the 2. Every reasonable intendment should thus be
institution of the adoption. After the paternal sustained to promote and fulfill these noble and
grandmother passed away, the minors were compassionate objectives of the law.
being supported by the petitioner. Her children
B. Persons Whose Written Consent are
abroad gave their written consent for their
Needed to the Adoption
adoption.

A Social Worker of the Department of 3. The written consent of the following to the
adoption is hereby required:
Social Welfare and Development submitted a
Report recommending for the adoption and (a) The adoptee, if ten (10) years of age or over;
narrated that Amelia had been consulted with the
adoption plan and after weighing the benefits of (b) The biological parent(s) of the child, if
adoption to her children, she voluntarily known, or the legal guardian, or the proper
consented. government instrumentality which has legal
custody of the child;
Petitioner failed to present the social
worker as witness and offer in evidence the (c) The legitimate and adopted sons/daughters, ten
voluntary consent of Amelia to the adoption. (10) years of age or over, of the adopter(s) and
Petitioner also failed to present any documentary adoptee, if any;
evidence to prove that Amelia assent to the
adoption. Despite such, the trial court granted (d) The illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10) years
the petition. When the Republic appealed before of age or over, of the adopter, if living with said
the Court of Appeals, the appellate court adopter and the latter's spouse, if any;
reversed the assailed decision. (e) The spouse, if any, of the person adopting or to
be adopted.
C. Purpose for the Indispensable interference by interlopers, and to insure the
Requirement of Consent and Notice to the opportunity to safeguard the best interests of the
Natural Parents child in the manner of the proposed adoption.

4. The general requirement of consent and notice 5. The written consent of the biological parents is
to the natural parents is intended to protect the indispensable for the validity of a decree of
natural parental relationship from unwarranted adoption. Indeed, the natural right of a parent to
his child requires that his consent must be 10. Merely permitting the child to remain for a
obtained before his parental rights and duties may be time undisturbed in the care of others is not such
terminated and re-established in adoptive parents. an abandonment. To dispense with the
requirement of consent, the abandonment must
D. The Petitioner Should Have Adduced the
be shown to have existed at the time of adoption.
Written Consent of the Legal Guardian
F. When Amelia Left for Italy, She Did
6. When Landingin filed her petition with the
Not Intend to Abandon her Children
trial court, Rep. Act No. 8552 was already in
effect. Section 9 thereof provides that if the 11. When Amelia left for Italy, she had not
written consent of the biological parents cannot intended to abandon her children, or to
be obtained, the written consent of the legal permanently sever their mother-child
guardian of the minors will suffice. relationship. She was merely impelled to leave
the country by financial constraints. Yet, even
7. If, as claimed by petitioner, that the biological
while abroad, she did not surrender or relinquish
mother of the minors had indeed abandoned
entirely her motherly obligations of rearing the
them, she should, thus have adduced the written
children to her mother-in-law.
consent of their legal guardian.
12. The adoption of the minors will have the
E. Abandonment Should Evince a Settled
effect of severing all legal ties between the
Purpose to Forego all Parental Duties
biological mother, Amelia, and the adoptees, and
8. Abandonment by a parent to justify the that the same shall then be vested on the adopter.
adoption of his child without his consent, is a
13. It would thus be against the spirit of the law
conduct which evinces a settled purpose to
if financial consideration were to be the
forego all parental duties.
paramount consideration in deciding whether to
9. The term means neglect and refusal to deprive a person of parental authority over
perform the filial and legal obligations of love his/her children.
and support. If a parent withholds presence, love, care,
G. The Affidavit of Consent of Petitioner’s
the opportunity to display filial affection, and neglects to
Presented are Inadmissible as Evidence
lend support and maintenance, the parent, in effect,
abandons the child. 14. Petitioner failed to offer in evidence the
DSWD Report and of the Joint Affidavit of
Consent purportedly executed by her children;
the authenticity of which she, likewise, failed to
prove.

15. the Rules of Court in the same way as a

document notarized in this country, it needs to
comply with Section 2 of Act No. 2103, which
was not done by the petitioner.

16. As the alleged written consent of petitioner's

legitimate children did not comply with the law,
the same can at best be treated by the Rules as a
private document whose authenticity must be
proved either by anyone who saw the document
executed or written; or by evidence of the
genuineness of the signature or handwriting of
the makers.

17. No further proof was introduced by

petitioner to authenticate the written consent of
her legitimate children, the same is inadmissible
in evidence.

H. The Financial Capacity of the Prospective

Parents Should be Carefully Evaluated

18. Since the primary consideration in adoption

is the best interest of the child, it follows that the
financial capacity of prospective parents should
also be carefully evaluated and considered.
Certainly, the adopter should be in a position to
support the would-be adopted child or children,
in keeping with the means of the family.

19. Given the facts of the case, it is indeed

doubtful whether petitioner will be able to
sufficiently handle the financial aspect of rearing
the three children in the United States. She only
has a part-time job, and she is rather of age.

From: MyLegalWhiz (edited for the digest pool)